On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Behcet Sarikaya <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Brian, > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Brian E Carpenter > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> a) Since this is fixing some of the damage done by NAT, it's >> really unfinished business for BEHAVE, which if iirc was a >> Transport Area WG. Just saying... >> >> b) The word "privacy" doesn't appear in the draft. Discussing >> privacy aspects is clearly essential if there is any thought of >> advancing this work. Actually I doubt if such a host ID is ever >> going to be acceptable from a privacy point of view, unless the >> end system is at liberty to change it at random (like RFC 4941). > > Scott Brim said there are no privacy issues.
I said I don't believe this introduces any NEW privacy issues, as long as host-ids change at least as often as IP addresses. I hope you will get other opinions. I just might be wrong, eh? Scott _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
