On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 06:07:52AM -0700, d...@lutean.com wrote: > > > iOS 14 > > > > CISCO provides an IOS, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco_IOS > > My second guess on IOS is an Apple Computer Inc product. > > > > > > > will by default use randomized, private MAC addresses. > > > > Yeah right, let's sell a depleted MAC address pool > > as a privacy improvement ... > > > > It is an upcoming feature of Apple products that will be on > by default: https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT211227 > > It is already available through the public beta. > > So Apple devices as of October or sooner will be > changing their MAC addresses by default > > > > > > In my testing these devices use a MAC address with the LAA bit set > > > (2nd least significant bit of the first byte of the MAC). It restricts > > > this to host addresses (least significant bit is set to 0). > > > > Speaks about two bits > > > > > > > This patch detects MAC addresses with this bit set and tags the request > > > with > > > the tag "laa-address". This would allow other rules to decide what to do > > > with these requests (such as ignoring them). > > > > Speaks about one bit > > > > > > > > Speaking about bits, see > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address#/media/File:MAC-48_Address.svg > > for the "exploded view" > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address#Unicast_vs._multicast > > The reason two bits are tested is because: > - one bit is the UAA / LAA bit > - one bit is the unicast / multicast bit > > so this patch wouldn't tag LAA multicast MAC addresses should > those happen to be in use somewhere. > > So specifically a device with an LAA unicast MAC address > would get a tag. This requires testing two bits. >
OK, thanks for elaborating Groeten Geert Stappers -- Silence is hard to parse _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
