On 21/10/2013 21:19, Cutler James R wrote:
4. Does Apple's approach to IPv6 privacy addresses properly support the intent of privacy addresses? My tentative answer is, "Yes, and we need to learn to cope."
The general approach perhaps, but the rollover timing is way, way too aggressive IMO. It should be on a timer, not driven by PHY wake events. Even 300 seconds would be an improvement over the behaviour we're seeing.
As to "we need to learn to cope" - lots of networks have huge amounts of capital investment which can't just be ripped out and replaced overnight because Apple have decided to be aggressive with address rollovers. If the main outcome is for FIB-pressured sites to disable IPv6 on OUIs registered to Apple, it's a retrograde step ;o)
Maybe we need a "neigbour un-advert" ICMPv6 message that the old addresses could be torn down with.
