IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt - Privacy Properties

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 20 July 2017 09:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE604131566 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 mymA3kO3LzoF for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22b.google.com (mail-pg0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22b]) (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 A3D7612ECF0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id 123so12151858pgj.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7Gl5bxElcK0gh0M4Jwy8eJOngyMcXz938QSglSmI26g=; b=VRLEszziYHsSl0DejdnQ6wE94MBC748LxC/IUun9lOnNymOFwN4hxF/GhKWzQLzdBI pp/0+6bSLQn7zLU/81EXBSSjSgzKFy+u6R5Ksy4PKD7gqZ2nUkQBWFMgUVJK7p662/Vn vuhnUVBDQ5EH5U2y3MmJK2CBfS4cYkn8jaoHJ7yLwIK73qUHtaTLnyW/0TYSHlhWi7ih wWklb6BN69c7y6JEm7RvL1KKHD6jXe6I4SBqaDirLjBQAPXHz7hHgS6cHJfaQ6nxLrXt OvS+7BNZR9fSI54CZKg548UcXlP9bLFx3mlxNc2AsC5oFvJAORvv5J4fq6BEA+9Af8I5 S3fg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7Gl5bxElcK0gh0M4Jwy8eJOngyMcXz938QSglSmI26g=; b=Gf+wIxbwaN1F+/dxtU1Jh0bdCENjDaXRCjfZoQbptYKLxYyNuTy6MRCJIb2nYzeZ0+ 4nmlYeFxO8Db2Ilm5KeVS/XQgWON6v0S6WVtDblv3ZZx6WcjDWGSQLn8z9PoktWKC4dM sf78kQcJgclGRESk4Hx6C95KQiBJTcKv8VxTIodY+g8zM39F4OV8udl8She6pQsgAOtp swtnbl7WZ26UBOeO4i+L7ZE7s9SKrlGjz6T5qgt12TIzklHVEzygVwi/nFeWqzqoIeQc /jd/I04AQjRU2DpA6p7Vltcb9+WVuc1lExmj7K7pRU9BEjQ2q+46UJHX2JOB2IffuVZX KgLQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw113bYG0D8YKyMnJ8b8KwPg6SmfKlVAoUFo9xD6eBD0lI0jNDiwZe EPcEpfIIbh66dOGOGNKOQ+39uaBQTbot
X-Received: by 10.98.7.87 with SMTP id b84mr3224982pfd.216.1500541673259; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.181.42 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <52ed5fcd-8af5-5b6b-4328-002a431977b6@gmail.com>
References: <596CF817.8040900@foobar.org> <BC0BBAF5-B016-44B5-8D73-BC9382CB79A9@google.com> <20170719090835.GC45648@Space.Net> <CAKD1Yr29MmGJuX+uhXaroB6UMRBBWBscCZPaMjaVscL0q7a7pg@mail.gmail.com> <98208c2e-7524-7afa-b0c8-865f251cd66e@gmail.com> <20170720062751.GL45648@Space.Net> <CAKD1Yr1ihnqHAzjhPcA8HB7sBBRwht2t5epJqQA-B_YGnfoTQA@mail.gmail.com> <52ed5fcd-8af5-5b6b-4328-002a431977b6@gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:07:12 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1mzRmX6ZccDS8O642N-Lkq5=FZuUHUEFotwo9CFuMNsAQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1143ccc467d61d0554bc15b7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/FDv-R990wYfIWDteVOIrVUQBOZs>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt - Privacy Properties
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 09:07:56 -0000

Alexandre, in order for that to be the case it must be true that the DHCP
server is actively working to arrange for it to be the case that clients
get addresses with good privacy characteristics.   What we are seeing in
the field is that addresses are being allocated out of very small ranges,
with no concern given to privacy.   So as a practical matter, the advice in
the RFC is the correct advice.

It's possible that we could change that, but I don't see the point.   It's
fine that DHCP servers work the way they do, as long as clients can also do
SLAAC.   DHCP simply does not address this use case, nor need it do so.

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Alexandre Petrescu <
alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> Le 20/07/2017 à 10:21, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit :
> [...]
>
>> SLAAC addresses provide ample address space and have robust privacy
>> properties
>>
>
> Do you mean DHCP-Address(IA_NA) does not have robust privacy properties?
>   I think it does - it can deliver multiple addresses to Client, each
> from a distinct /64 prefix.  That would be more privacy than SLAAC which
> does vary the 64 IID but within same prefix.
>
> Alex
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email