Margaret Wasserman wrote: >>How much this will help you depends on the circumstances. It could help a >>lot in some cases (e.g. when the prefix changes rapidly too), close to >>zero in others (e.g. when your prefix is nearly static). > > The use of temporary addresses in IPv6 will make it somewhat harder for > servers to track information about individual IPv6 hosts. They could > still store tracking information based on the prefix, but they would > not know if the prefix refers to a single host or a large multi-user > network.
I think perhaps the point is that if users (households, for example) are assigned prefixes, rather than addresses, then if that prefix assignment is pretty static, having a random interface identifier does little to hide the identity of the household. So, while random interface identifiers may make the full address in IPv6 less predictable than in IPv4, the prefix assignment policies of the network provider may make that a cause the upper 64 bits to be just as identifying as typical IPv4 addresses. I'm not sure it's likely to be worse than v4, but I think its unlikely to be any better since we're recommending households get assigned a subnet in v6, the way they are assigned an address in v4. It depends on the amount of prefix affinity the network provider enforces/allows. -josh -- ===================================================================== Josh Littlefield Cisco Systems, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 Apollo Drive tel: 978-497-8378 fax: same Chelmsford, MA 01824-3627 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
