IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Address privacy

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Mon, 27 January 2020 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 2C00A3A0EB1 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:46:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 0b-mcGXT0h5O for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:46:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E30AA3A0E8C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:46:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.100.103] (unknown [186.183.48.158]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CAD9F86B28; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:46:10 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: Address privacy
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <CALx6S36802oDaEgojAPq2c6hM_s1BayidXPh1Sc6RZmZa9UHpQ@mail.gmail.com> <89CDA9FE-6C41-4A5E-B6CD-ECC367DFDABA@employees.org>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <d9935ce8-10a5-c71c-b329-55de88c8e0ac@si6networks.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:45:51 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <89CDA9FE-6C41-4A5E-B6CD-ECC367DFDABA@employees.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/w8YaPOXF7489WWvhYU1GY652qWM>
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: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 21:46:18 -0000

On 26/1/20 17:20, Ole Troan wrote:
> The obvious answer is to put the source address in the encrypted payload. It does not have to be in the core header.
> There’s a paper on it somewhere, although I am not sure if that’s where the idea originated.

Where would errors be reported to?
And, would such a proposal also deprecate BCP38?

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email