Re: [Pearg] Proposed work on the topic of: IP Address Privacy

Luigi Iannone <> Tue, 18 May 2021 10:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D263A179C for <>; Tue, 18 May 2021 03:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AVG1JK-mN3IH for <>; Tue, 18 May 2021 03:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73EA23A179A for <>; Tue, 18 May 2021 03:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id u4-20020a05600c00c4b02901774b80945cso1234002wmm.3 for <>; Tue, 18 May 2021 03:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=+PtBjd20XkjfKbe9dk5S5XQGcdmDTwOIgmQCRdLvoi0=; b=OtXos7GY0zIiu9UvAQuh3S+p1QOC8S1IJwHUt7PUpJ9lsH+gb9Gj3zab2f9pz5vP9w othPh6Le5iukuy/rpq7MlnrdJ0IgEO+zYqSGJYEWfMnsBDKD0Qt6DWyDpFIJ7piPNp3Z +fBWarMmRAYpY0mGhT0mwQ2ROnw8bsc8UQBSt4cdNBni8ki5HtlCB7EjnsaHEtXTLxP6 yTcy7LqMLje3nKdIAuMBSRPz3Xp75hVimvxk6/7MxPogUxavcRmFQA3muGVITi10L5CJ l+H6SMDZj2oPpmjJll8WOvDEIZ1pYF9QetbH99fg6wMjaaKowwD/IaPRhfad5WZx0w8J ePQA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=+PtBjd20XkjfKbe9dk5S5XQGcdmDTwOIgmQCRdLvoi0=; b=K+k5M5r6tNAhl9cCmGDTeBAI6Qn4HfZ43g8dYz/aTmODmuDvB7WOKtwRYSaROg7Iti XPJR4FimdnCOFNUs8hIyZm1odSTcvzd0cTvSMSCOcFXY5xFL1n8oNnAt8H4lLp/KDEkP tHZCj+ywwG5FbRlUkWqhx1mJEowB1V7j9rgOCZq//wFpegmF3Fio8jneo1s+XbZ8iAja ASVusU622J2abhnDmshDRzu8S0f+ix2Muota7KfvQMYxvjdX+sbJlrGbrrmTMv9B2XAM /+AEfFmdfVoUq6oBKOVHTNLMP2uYG1SIcQWGSF+M/VuOhjI2Tv1Nu5Km3ssM1EFhHJ2/ UzxQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532GLyzuTT9xsGYXAoafmmWD/OeZ3nVILsaCvlMAIg7+9USsaEOP 8l/hlJPxXkqNXmGa1fVMyFROFg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwQtaZ5wYY4Zf8kccpRmIZrTVtZeRJgvMx4iObLw5ds/d5XJsdjsT8dxdC5wKtYKhwLLfdhdg==
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c304:: with SMTP id k4mr4325556wmj.68.1621335125010; Tue, 18 May 2021 03:52:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([2a01:e0a:1ec:470:419e:909c:e48f:d062]) by with ESMTPSA id q20sm2558586wmq.2.2021. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 18 May 2021 03:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.\))
From: Luigi Iannone <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 12:52:01 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Sara Dickinson <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Pearg] Proposed work on the topic of: IP Address Privacy
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 10:52:13 -0000


> On 14 May 2021, at 11:42, Sara Dickinson <> wrote:
> Hi PEARG, 
> This is a belated follow up to the Interim meeting and IETF110 discussion on the topic of "IP Address Privacy".
> There appeared to be interest in working on one or more documents to capture the current status and future research directions in this space. A general proposal for such work could include:
> * An analysis of the current use cases, attempting to categorise/group such use cases where commonalities exist
> * Generating requirements for proposed 'replacement signals' from this analysis (these could be different for each category/group of use cases)
> * Research to evaluate existing technologies or propose new mechanisms for such signals
> One request was to have a broad scope for the range of use cases considered. We may need a first pass at the initial analysis to see if this is really feasible. 
> The chairs would like to hear if
> 1) The above is a reasonable summary of work that folks think could/should be done in PEARG

Yes. Reasonable summary. 

> 2) If people are interested in volunteering to work on some or all of this

Happy to help, especially on the third item.



> Please let us know your thoughts on this topic during the next couple of weeks. Before the end of May, we’ll try to summarise the responses and the plan for moving forward. 
> Best regards
> Sara, on behalf of the chairs.
> -- 
> Pearg mailing list