IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses for the network)

Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> Sun, 26 January 2020 16:16 UTC

Return-Path: <jared@puck.nether.net>
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 E6458120018 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 08:16:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=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 f-KK-p501RGB for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 08:16:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from puck.nether.net (puck.nether.net [204.42.254.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78276120046 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 08:16:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.109.109] (107-137-170-100.lightspeed.livnmi.sbcglobal.net [107.137.170.100]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by puck.nether.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C4DAD5401C4; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:16:05 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-AE1E344B-E239-4A8A-AD1E-9C010FFF38F8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses for the network)
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <D4C40CE0-B8BE-47AF-9E69-BDE7513E35CB@fugue.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:16:02 -0500
Cc: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Message-Id: <1C48AB82-CDDA-4050-A7ED-67B6B7DA30D2@puck.nether.net>
References: <D4C40CE0-B8BE-47AF-9E69-BDE7513E35CB@fugue.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17C54)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/qDgWPpPDkNrV2cyI6sHMpXqVIHY>
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 16:16:10 -0000

The systems rotate them away over the course of a week. You may not see this in a environment where you use many different networks. If your network is stable, such as an enterprise you will see this. 

Call it a bug if you want to dismiss the design principle but the privacy folks have it wrong here when you break the user with forced rotation for the sake of a principle that may not apply in an enterprise (you generally have no right to privacy here).  

Sent from my iCar

> On Jan 26, 2020, at 10:28 AM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
> 
> On Jan 26, 2020, at 6:56 AM, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>> It also means things like my ssh sessions can't last long enough to do large transfers as the address is rotated away. 
> 
> If there’s a TCP session holding a reference count on the address, why is it being deleted?  That sounds like a bug, not a problem with privacy addresses.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email