Re: Consensus call on adopting: <draft-gont-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-01>

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

On 04/21/2012 06:10 AM, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
>>> The client application
>>> based on the policy should pick pivate or EUI-64 addresses.
>>
>> Just curious: Is there a specific use case for IEEE-derived addresses
>> that cannot be satisfied with draft-gont-6man-stable-privacy-addresses?
> 
> The existing implementations. The most important factor of introduction
> of new standards to interoperate the existing ones. I think this should
> be documented in your  draft. 

Could you please clarify what you're referring to, specifically? --
i.e., this address generation mechanism is backwards-compatible.



> Furthermore there are several firewalls
> and monitoring tools which is generating warning in case of IEEE-derived
> address and MAC mismatch. This has to be investigated and documented in
> the draft.

You mean that updated implementations would automatically generate
addresses differently?

In this case, my take is that *updates* should probably not enable this
mechanism by default, or at the very least have a system toggle to turn
this feature off.

For new devices (i.e., off-the-box rather than software-updated), this
should probably be enabled by default.



>>> I think the proper implementation of RFC 3041 or/and 4941 can solve your
>>> problem
>>
>> I don't follow. RFC 4941 generates addresses in addition to the stable
>> ones, so.. how could they possibly fix the scanning problem?
> 
> I think the stablity/network supervisor ability to track devices is
> enough justification for stable privacy addresses. 

Agreed. But someone might argue that you can achieve this with IPv6
addresses that embed IEEE-identifiers or
randomized-but-stable-across-networks IIDs... but these fail to address
other problems.


> Scanning is not so
> important. I know there are several new techniques - I am warning about
> the possible methods for several years in my presentations.
> http://www2.garr.it/conf_05_slides/j_mohacsi-IPv6_sec.pdf

Will check your slides -- thanks for the pointer!

Cheers,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492