Re: 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-11.txt>

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 17 May 2016 11:33 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 C69A112D829 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 04:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.126
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.126 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 V0nN4qf_iBfX for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 04:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x22c.google.com (mail-yw0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22c]) (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 C32D912D824 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2016 04:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id x189so12027785ywe.3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2016 04:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SNOEGmDabl1V+D+zwHGBynpZZZtapL2NhvnQHXjShww=; b=E+C9aKYJSIz8/7CvcSdWNTNk3UxxGuUU8/sDeOMbfJVy+XhNDUkwWHq1Eh+QFAG/z6 fB9aAhR10NvGFIOIt0HvNmQ8lyfKiSKiht+4C8ESJJk110xI8DM1wcIiMmcEeSGMZELK H0FOQjmfEIQLhTcRuJ9NBHZKr5zTiLnWvGo1jZFGUlTFl+M3/x+DB8O5fjqrUsOSi1Pn rgpykLDcqROeWZiAu3vvDlc10eqWriDtaGFjISjDiAv7SZY3uykQbmBWNMWt89cNUTSH HxzaIR6fjroGgWqSV0CKH3f8rfI/Y7rSSOyQPzxL23O4q4RG6jClQBzcxW2elwXF9VJt GHuQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SNOEGmDabl1V+D+zwHGBynpZZZtapL2NhvnQHXjShww=; b=kCGavZrE8NLGJJ4XoWqaY39Bfry7veRBItepIUrtP/byarR2m7n/sKGRBx+PZWL44Z I9+FUFHnUTZOn5Ih63rO+5DSkNFhbR9UdOLdSGF0y5GufVNaaOZ8Cx1alcvmA2jPTMxv mx/eNPPDwffLy+/qBdv8ICgAfSOn0zPM7hvA6R/OD5sMT+VaMZuekUW6EylRPnkOjNVA mMbUrchl5ojXXHMn6ULhovdLcsF+a3fncObXuRtfeuG/hTQdzXT+GvItt40G6GegsujN J9YhTh+V/zZ+IrA/HvrTO0Uq+qBkA+DdYIvVl2DYcfwtofuLnD3+S53iGPGdpJivySNM Qd1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWa/wbJpwYl4jNO+sSmbrC3jhZRKVK5lI7b+6TqCEdUiEZZWd391B7SeGbEc0lQXdR/gJ5M1FyqoFV3cO17
X-Received: by 10.129.108.208 with SMTP id h199mr337316ywc.229.1463484800963; Tue, 17 May 2016 04:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.198.68 with HTTP; Tue, 17 May 2016 04:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <41533F2B-C2AC-46A9-BB67-511EFE9D3861@cooperw.in>
References: <20160428004904.25189.43047.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <89CA2C18-AE61-4D40-8997-221201835944@gmail.com> <6f2edbbc-d208-03a0-3c33-503a05c0bee8@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1So_tFFSr=sk8ew-UJG-dWK=U6N9mwJnwkZdNX=__SVQ@mail.gmail.com> <41533F2B-C2AC-46A9-BB67-511EFE9D3861@cooperw.in>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 20:33:01 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr054-AkiA6=G4hCznPxdFFeMh7TZzKFyi+HfgLKVon_Jw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-11.txt>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114db904b2962d0533081b79"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/xkSlfUG-J23ayX3mDJSZCiDZ0C0>
Cc: IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 17 May 2016 11:33:24 -0000

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:13 AM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:

> This draft forbids implementations from using existing address generation
> mechanisms using random MAC addresses,
>
> The draft does not forbid anything.
>

Ok, then let me restate the objection:

The draft strongly recommends against implementations using existing
address generation mechanisms using random MAC addresses which is a
perfectly valid way to address the privacy problem this draft is
purportedly solving, and is an approach standardized in other IETF work,
for example,
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-anonymity-profile-08#section-2.1
(now in RFC editor queue).


> It has two MUST-level requirements: that mechanisms be defined, and that
> those mechanisms meet certain requirements.
>

But that makes no sense at all. It's circular reasoning: this document says
that link layers MUST define mechanisms. To do so it proceeds to update a
number of RFCs, including RFC 2464, to say that interface identifiers MUST
be generated as specified in this document... which only says that
link-layers MUST define mechanisms. So the updated text violates the very
document you're updating it to refer to.