Re: 64bit MAC addresses and SLAAC

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Thu, 18 June 2020 00:04 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 800003A043D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:04:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eXZ6NJguA5dZ for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:04:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd33.google.com (mail-io1-xd33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01EDD3A0440 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd33.google.com with SMTP id u13so5020543iol.10 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lRyknTvMHBcITkSKGno1ylCda9H6Jq2ByJo2g1BedTg=; b=lUgRQH9ubizIlxFkyS4gS8meTBRcjVGwgoB+nruN/09g1VaaL2oU39IcMGy3w7AjM4 F+IXOK2y8s39PbiElyYUosGrwq1p7fo+GWhEKpbLGBneVPxpzn0EagSpNfMoE3lZubwY LsgqEYnypoRtF/rVuYy7pozo/HbuNT2AGYmUad0QKTjPF6J5TFop/5uf7uSrO4bZvuJt yviPHsWaA21PSscBV29q68g4K0JuxwqduSt9/aqtwkLuaXZ/1pYW0vZJxTbfiQE/fr6b D4z7zld5EzuOR5Uvt9VhcXDNoHNMvtfPlqbGAReDWBDcl+jxVvVt761i/qb5Wx7vusr/ iEFw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lRyknTvMHBcITkSKGno1ylCda9H6Jq2ByJo2g1BedTg=; b=W2y53zpSZnkVYbS1A33+NAJgtSsrec39jVQs5LWYYl5ZNub36Aw188NVniW9rp2BQu N8a80Ks5E7oo2CtBXmNx2BeObPtics1cnXCsz1mWYEJG2jaMDt6G/D2uxnHmIQlrIcHx C7TzFAO2YQ7e8ekg3Xs6CFu4dTNJEzxbYCT/OpPaW+tIOkSHCUfM/16v1YPZonob5Ohf 26YarY7/FtDQ4fV61zTMV7zJdBM8IVE0sgKQSxuMKOCUENtebTFjb3oW82Fjs/2sPMJj xq3mdviRHWwQVNXeiXdg9jbgEKIF8FUw8kCvLeGlKw5J6noBJV00lpVO4bQVBuxvhVBS 9YPg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531nlAGBranIAS04QsyMalAh8QWBOSaxp/RhrBBk/LxIIbBiL86F BuvJCgTo1vAGAYzTEmFtI7nbPbOUmkR0dy6EN0amHSwjiOA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxPoHqPRTBXnsqwXW1VzQpTK1lPxgDfyBfvw451qiaPfXoDX873A8f/jTRgewqiahqVJhiiHa1LoxjYshbtqhM=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:cd89:: with SMTP id l9mr1874474jap.88.1592438656259; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <e8a25961-5ac9-d35e-77dd-bf86f45cd077@gmail.com> <a17ae9f3-001c-07f6-84f9-a0ca583e6a00@gmail.com> <7AE5B6D0-AB01-4077-A9EF-5BD86F428681@gmail.com> <CAC8QAcdDjQvonke7hytV8pCYsTAjATNi560v_b32jus_jDW8bw@mail.gmail.com> <b43a00f5-c957-923a-cef4-ed541ebdb39a@gmail.com> <a96f1262-d152-dc09-1c2f-b2604ca21890@si6networks.com> <m1jlb8u-0000JDC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <d23c967b-29fc-cf94-d51b-70d200ee195f@si6networks.com> <CABNhwV2+pq9fwWA=X4eN064gdtOV628pgaSMmDEyq3ANX6xZxg@mail.gmail.com> <m1jlg0W-0000LDC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
In-Reply-To: <m1jlg0W-0000LDC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 20:04:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CABNhwV20QRsS6eROFVVCi8eJ9r+3Wa0DYVo5czXF190JhqQZ+g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 64bit MAC addresses and SLAAC
To: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006edaa305a85084aa"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Sz5OLFGzn9EEiPBvUIk-IBlsKFY>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 00:04:21 -0000

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:54 PM Philip Homburg <
pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote:

> >   Of course the caveat there with unmanaged network and SOHO and Mobile
> >where manual or DHCPV6 is not possible or viable.
>
> Why is DHCPv6 not possible? Of course there is the Android problem.
> But I doubt that a low power IoT device would share a wifi-link with an
> Android device.


   I used use cases where the individual or unmanaged networks in those
cases may not have the expertise to setup dhcpv6

>
>
> >    In those cases SLAAC is preferred, but then we have the crux of
> >    issue and the decision tree on privacy random IID and its overhead
> >    if its not necessary versus modified EUI64.
> >    tree of course the underlying operational impacts of random
> >    versus  stable IID double edged sword operator or individuals
> >    decision to pick which works best for their use case.  In the
> >    end net-net is what is simplest to deploy and least overhead
> >    but also meets the desired goal is generally the thought for
> >    picking the IID generation solution. For that SLAAC wins out in
> >    that decision for the use case described above.
>
> A stable, unique pseudo random IID per prefix basically requires one
> SHA2-HMAC (or equivalent in SHA3 or other modern hash function) per
> prefix.
>
> I cannot imagine that computing 2 SHA2 hashes has a significant amount
> of energy use compared to link attachment and duplicate address detection.
>
> This computation is once per prefix, so it becomes an issue if the
> devices frequently attaches to new links. In which case tracking protection
> becomes important.
>
> I also wonder, a device that cannot afford a couple SHa2 hashes? Then that
> device is probably insecure and should not be connect to the internet
> anyhow.


   I don’t have the expertise on energy consumption issues on mobile but it
did appear from the thread that issues due exist with random over stable
IID.  Technically speaking I don’t understand why.

>
>
>
> --

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *



*M 301 502-134713101 Columbia Pike *Silver Spring, MD