IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Sat, 25 January 2020 19:32 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 027C912004C for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:32:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 CC6WjqPSmb4Q for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:32:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (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 125EB12001E for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:32:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id s187so5655512qke.8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:32:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Wzb0gvDUQFbT3ovogF2EgbOP4ip9YyAoSCH0AdJUyhw=; b=ELnGJHoD8iBUoAnSswih+XbWVSzQ7eOt6tALo/MvtQzGn93jPDdvdeZOioOpH4Byt7 OzFET4mR3krmm0kFwCtPSktoQfJm6h+Nv5YGed4fmNTLXF9k4/X7FA/yUv1On/PLWGf9 pXx77f/v01YSnicX3xqGh+AaljbfBqzz/PIFO2xBtxl7ss1YuHDurLCpa1VyamD97QpW HB2tNWUi4Xk1VL79KsFhTzh1yAqfumbiDY7y9XcG3qpBbmDEpHrXYfnzGwgw5u1tP4Sy b56BUGDIb3eCI/dfP40wMVFfFRo8sefi1xN0ju4fmplu8vALdlqpv2IO3ZHzTdgAuzAI MT7w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Wzb0gvDUQFbT3ovogF2EgbOP4ip9YyAoSCH0AdJUyhw=; b=VpqXPvyiSCwyY0deueE0G9xJmeW1c7jdZeHQsOe3vqFzmmcbZP5IirTX61yA9rfKbD nbqMQ0yR00+UBDHs2K6OgDYem4rHz67wHSajagZOIztHYt5gfLfqXG9vq/OKPyJsM4Ob oNuacbhAu22sdZ0kEZp0ACqBAf7MlwMzefTxeky26q5nei3AdpWFl6ZlnJjNNhrbpug+ /4CTO9ZDSB56IiZ/a+0eKKoS3Q/oKgy3RcZa5R54Fso3l+kv+y3LfXAj94dN50ARNhUk 8VyGmao7TpndJWxls2ZnFWX85f9BaBFDdyem1LbWJAf2LRSWVPr7NpOUKoxf24S4nkAJ F0Sw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXaut9zu8PNz5FoN9o34tCkW5NyV+yFQr8YOzs12yDuQHjKK/I3 W0T4kCWx7jU1V3a6tQKJEVDsPuvB597rDA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwx2Hu2R6OR4IepjDqW5KTv7U0BqAmWgdI4CSW8+W+MDl7lOJXCO43sugwh+n/H5hsH3tWiUA==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:6551:: with SMTP id z78mr9523316qkb.144.1579980730362; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:32:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:5dcb:1c62:6c5d:4337? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:5dcb:1c62:6c5d:4337]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i14sm5770665qkl.133.2020.01.25.11.32.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:32:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <E09CA869-B0FB-494E-AF9E-1E9CA989E341@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_06C1EC63-2944-48D4-B013-C00F601458C1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.4\))
Subject: Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses for the network)
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2020 14:32:08 -0500
In-Reply-To: <11855.1579980079@localhost>
Cc: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/qjyn-YIC-SRpZOvkHfoDcHJLl8M>
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: Sat, 25 Jan 2020 19:32:14 -0000

On Jan 25, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> Except that instead of doing it at layer 4, you do it with IPsec, and extrude
> that /128 to your machine.  This is already a thing :-)

You mean a VPN?   Yes.  But in a VPN, all your flows are going through the same tunnel.

>> Another solution I’ve considered is to have a giant anonymity mesh,
>> with every ISP’s user participating, and forward flows through this
>> mesh, treating each customer as an anonymity server.   I think this is
> 
> This is also a thing called Tor.

I know.  And there’s a reason why I don’t run a Tor exit node.   But thinking about how to do this without that problem seems worthwhile.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email