Re: Feedback on draft-gont-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-01

[Fred Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Apr 14, 2012, at 5:07 PM, Christian Huitema wrote:

>> As I read it, section three item one calls for the use of the EUI-64 in use on the interface, which presumes that the 
>> interface is an IEEE 802 LAN. There are other interface types. I'd like to see that widened to a number *such*as*
>> one of the set I specified.
> 
> You don't really need the EUI64 for the proposal to work. We could just as well completely omit the field, and simply use the EUI64 as an optional seed for the random number. But there are two advantages:
> 
> * Using some form of interface ID allows the host to keep just one random seed for all interfaces, which is nice.
> * using EUI64 in a context like SEND makes spoofing a little bit harder.

I have no problem with the EUI-64 if one exists. I'm pointing out that not all interfaces have one. They might have an E.164 or E.212 number, or other things.