Re: Running code - IPv6 mDNS MacBook Pro privacy (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-03.txt)

[David Schinazi <[e-mail]>]

Hello Alexandre,

The DNSSD working group is working on privacy-preserving service discovery,
to avoid your device name and service list being disclosed to everyone on
link. If this is of interest, please join us Thursday afternoon session 1:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/103/materials/agenda-103-dnssd-01

That said, this is independent of IPv4/IPv6/IPv6-only-bit. The problem will
be solved at the DNSSD layer, not inside IPv4 or IPv6.

David

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 5:50 AM Alexandre Petrescu <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> Le 30/10/2018 à 16:18, Toerless Eckert a écrit :
>
> [...]
>
> I am not aware of any IP protocol version specific optimization options
> for mDNS. If there are common ways to make mDNS less chatty without
> slowing down discovery, they should be defined independently of the
> v6only flag discussion.
>
>
> True.  I think the IPv6 version of mDNS is probable more chatty than the
> IPv4 version, in some cases.  But even then, removing the IPv4 mDNS could
> only save battery, compared to IPv4+IPv6 versions of mDNS.
>
> As a side note, it is possible to improve other aspects of the IPv6
> version of mDNS only and not care about the IPv4 version.  One could ask
> Apple to make an improvement for the IPv6 version of mDNS with respect to
> privacy: stop putting the MacBook Pro owner's name in the mDNS request,
> because anybody on the link can see it and attach it to the global address.
>
> One would not ask Apple to do that for IPv4, because IPv4 is not worth the
> effort, and because there is no privacy risk there (the IP address is
> behind NAT).
>
>
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> Confounding the situation like you propoose is like "make ipv4 service
> discovery less chatty to a point that it may break because it doesn't
> matter if ipv6 is running" - and thats not a correct approach given how
> the service in question may be ipv4 only.
>
> There may be optimization options to prefer IPv6 over IPv4 discovery
> for dual-stack cases, maybe there is something already defined, but
> that could only be IMHO through timing - e.g.: look for service
> first via IPv6 and only try IPv4 adfter some short timeout. But that
> too would better be defined independently of the ipv6only flag
> discussion because its IMHO useful independent of the flag.
>
> Cheers
>     Toerless
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>