IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-gont-6man-managing-privacy-extensions-00.txt

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Sat, 12 March 2011 11:10 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7865A3A6B15 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:10:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XalIJWyMFZYr for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:10:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BE63A6AE4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:10:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by bwz13 with SMTP id 13so3698395bwz.31 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:12:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=De5MdgR37tz9xnkJrcFU8KRgKKdm2eu9MxycbNjK6gc=; b=EBqwecTVioMNrN6Ex+y6TSph3k3hpfrjyuE7FY9p1rU/YCZkNZ8ZtRJ4nPrTtwbPkZ CxRzsf2SY1CgtPgDW1sFtAfnSf0ZVdnZA0r46k669Hw93VF94Iz8hReS9jY0N+e9/myp fpefvfWFPsQ6zSO8ndfMZQFXrcImSIs/LjY/8=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=vjQJyOdDFY1Od9GMuUr7y9wgZqRc+pTssr2Snl1902Q0WkvsSauWY7Bk4IzmXmg4d9 sDrfLCRiXy54R20RH5mzL4NXzwpZ83GIfdOJeRrOPuro7KJYHXR9cD/O6dDy6tE9QIK6 Gg+Kl4tF3SMSTLxgcvrM+zT1uRi0J6MawxVrs=
Received: by 10.204.151.205 with SMTP id d13mr3822847bkw.117.1299928322967; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:12:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.200.28] ([194.2.150.133]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q18sm3606922bka.15.2011.03.12.03.11.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:12:02 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Fernando Gont <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D7B54FC.8090800@gont.com.ar>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 08:11:56 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-gont-6man-managing-privacy-extensions-00.txt
References: <7111FC5F-BC3F-4242-9C3F-037E79894749@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1103091212570.7942@uplift.swm.pp.se> <4D77CBB9.1080702@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D77CBB9.1080702@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ran Atkinson <ran.atkinson@gmail.com>, ipv6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:10:48 -0000

On 09/03/2011 03:49 p.m., Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> I don't think it solves what it thinks it solves, but if this REALLY
>> should be implemented, it's my initial thinking that the H flag should
>> be a MUST demand to only have ONE and only one MAC-based IPv6 address
>> according to EUI64. I would appreciate some reasoning in the draft why
>> this was chosen as a SHOULD option.
> 
> For the reason I just gave against the disable-private flag: this
> violates the host's right to use an untraceable address.
> 
> It may be that in corporate deployments, that right can be removed.
> But removing it for public subscribers would be a political blunder.

The requirements in draft-gont-6man-managing-privacy-extensions are
SHOULDs, for this very reason.

How about including some text that explicitly states that a host can
always override the desired policy (with a system toggle) if it desires
to do so?

Thanks!

Best regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email