JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Good point...I thought in this context we assume vendors implement > temporary addresses and users configure temporary addresses by > default. Otherwise, the original concern: > "The IESG is concerned that if temporary addresses are not enabled by > default, they won't see widespread use in practice." The logic is roughly as follows. The more barriers that exist w.r.t. the usage of temporary addresses, the less likely we'll see widespread usage. Today, they are optional. It's certainly a barrier that they have to be implemented to be used. :-) But even if they are implemented (say in typical OSes), but not used by default, who will actually use them? We would have to wait for individual appications to enable their use. We seem to have experience in other spaces that getting lots of applications to implement a desired capability can take a very long time... > If, for example, the premise is implementing and configuring temporary > addresses are both optional, I'll be just okay with the proposed > change. Today, implementation is optional. I think the document assumes if you implemente, you want to enable, but can't find exact words on this right off. 3041 does say, howoever: Finally, this document assumes that when a node initiates outgoing communication, temporary addresses can be given preference over public addresses. This can mean that all connections initiated by the node use temporary addresses by default, or that applications individually indicate whether they prefer to use temporary or public addresses. Giving preference to temporary address is consistent with on-going work that addresses the topic of source-address selection in the more general case [ADDR_SELECT]. An implementation may make it a policy that it does not select a public address in the event that no temporary address is available (e.g., if generation of a useable temporary address fails). > Users (or administrators) who dare to configure temporary > addresses under such an environments should have a strong desire for > privacy. So, even if the source address selection prefers public > address by default, such users will explicitly (try to) reverse the > logic for every communication. This makes the default meaningless, > and thus preferring temporary address should make much sense. > (though the premise would be meaningless according to the original > motivation; widespread use of temporary addresses) The default-addr-select document isn't mandating the use of temporary addresses. So what is being requested here is that *if* temporary addresses have been implemented and are being used, *then* give them preference over public addresses. Thomas -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
