IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Address privacy

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Sun, 26 January 2020 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
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 B55F5120098 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 13:37:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 BR5bjRrMLcoy for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 13:37:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7835F120052 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 13:37:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Envelope-To: ipv6@ietf.org
Received: from crumpet.local (089-101-070074.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.74] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 00QLb9e9038987 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 26 Jan 2020 21:37:09 GMT (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host 089-101-070074.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.74] (may be forged) claimed to be crumpet.local
Subject: Re: Address privacy
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <03C832CE-7282-4320-BF1B-4CB7167FE6BE@employees.org> <MN2PR11MB3565330989D411525D30B90DD80F0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <80207E17-AE8E-4D19-B516-D2E6AB70721E@employees.org> <8D5610EA-49D3-483E-BB7A-67D67BC89346@jisc.ac.uk> <DE7B0688-230F-4A5C-8E24-9EAED9FD9FEB@puck.nether.net> <CAO42Z2zXwVnzemRqyqy78czpHjZm0nhkCJgVrx=-fmt+C6MnSA@mail.gmail.com> <1962.1579823388@localhost> <f83ab037-9125-bb74-dbac-68850aeb1020@huitema.net> <CBB23ABE-A7A3-4208-873C-E47EE063E34B@fugue.com> <11855.1579980079@localhost> <CALx6S36V_VjaxhELYcsgDYLWsCkj20p6gtiY9T9Q=9-9Oibyjw@mail.gmail.com> <32626.1580060558@localhost> <CALx6S37prWACD0jv9c-XHD-JtPqZAcgeT2Ax0EZHkiQaDR4t=g@mail.gmail.com> <419b7c7a-e364-7951-5a44-6c39e1da65fb@joelhalpern.com> <CALx6S36802oDaEgojAPq2c6hM_s1BayidXPh1Sc6RZmZa9UHpQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Message-ID: <6c5ba72d-9289-90ba-a1c9-2307ed29a4da@foobar.org>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2020 21:37:08 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36802oDaEgojAPq2c6hM_s1BayidXPh1Sc6RZmZa9UHpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/W2JwD93yVxg4FYlCROQbQiswxo0>
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: Sun, 26 Jan 2020 21:37:17 -0000

Tom Herbert wrote on 26/01/2020 20:16:
> It's intuitive
> that a higher frequency of address rotation yields more privacy

intuitive, but probably inaccurate because of the a priori assumption 
that privacy is strongly associated with the endpoint identifier.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email