IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Sat, 12 March 2011 10:55 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 40F503A687D for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:55:25 -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 yTf3G1fKN42p for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:55:24 -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 170913A67E2 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:55:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by bwz13 with SMTP id 13so3692159bwz.31 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:56:43 -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=AJugqv+X/O8UWvG+izdNznEwrDIMtGTrCIf3yRxV0Hs=; b=mNyvHZF76XAHSO/7UWS3V1BCmzji8pSd8L/1IoM0qxtQaZr+h0ukg0F2uRaerVh9Sx 2PQcUIM6uCjQKC6MNw3Y86TNzUmXYWfNSNSTwf4hflPHevupGBI9+CSC2sZaTh3gWnnG SiefKLddGPEDCnNz/3uYn0km/UOTp3aLIqbvo=
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=UGqvOvdPsLH97JO6rUbqk3/R1EGN8wENcEdodIbIXPNAe0a6+gZ+Q8/owmJO9KmC/S /VLb/7u4EXIA2UfLMDeZsACRzQa5CgfH/jto+7FilJoFeT7HCWcJm8b/+hiD/WUrqW34 c0KCyzvaix/8BrQFUdIiBcTB3tRhx9OmQNIeA=
Received: by 10.204.20.81 with SMTP id e17mr3036413bkb.151.1299927403684; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:56:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.200.28] ([194.2.150.133]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u23sm3596915bkw.21.2011.03.12.02.56.38 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:56:41 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Fernando Gont <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D7B5164.1030306@gont.com.ar>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 07:56:36 -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: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1103091212570.7942@uplift.swm.pp.se>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org, Ran Atkinson <ran.atkinson@gmail.com>
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 10:55:25 -0000

Hi, Mikael,

On 09/03/2011 08:17 a.m., Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>> I recommend that folks read the above draft.  I haven't seen the
>> I-D announcement get cross-posted to the IPv6 WG, perhaps due to
>> the volume of recent I-D postings, and the topic seems relevant.
> 
> 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. 

Not sure what you mean... If H is set, why should we prevent generation
of MAC-based addresses of different scopes?


> I would appreciate some reasoning in the draft why
> this was chosen as a SHOULD option.

Because a "SHOULD" allows the host to override this policy if it has
good reasons to do so.

Thanks,
-- 
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