Hi, On 15 Sep 2013, at 18:26, S Moonesamy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello, > > I reviewed draft-ietf-homenet-arch-10. The following comment is about > Section 3.4.5 of draft-ietf-homenet-arch-10. The draft states that: > > "There are no specific privacy concerns discussed in this text. If > ISPs offer relatively stable IPv6 prefixes to customers, the network > prefix part of addresses associated with the homenet may not change > over a reasonably long period of time. This exposure is similar to > IPv4 networks using NAT, where the IPv4 address received from the ISP > may change over time, but not necessarily that frequently. > > The exposure is not similar to IPv4 networks using NAT. There can be more > than one user using an (outgoing) IPv4 address. That is usually not the case > for an outgoing IPv6 address. That can affect legal interception if the > requirement is to target a specific individual. The issue has indirectly > been discussed in IETF RFCs about address sharing. This could be expanded to be clearer, and to distinguish the ability to determine which homenet traffic came from (which is the perspective above) from the ability to determine which machine in a home particular traffic came from. In the former case I believe the above text is OK. In the latter case it depends how frequently the Privacy Address the device uses changes - in most cases IPv4 NAT "hides" the internal device better than IPv6 Privacy Addresses. Would that type of clarification answer your concern with the text? Tim _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
