[ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document - draft v.2 for review.

I like that …

In fact is consistent with what I told to Mikael, that the ISP will need to have a “button” to allow the customer to decide what they want to do by default or change the prefix at a given time.

Saludos,
Jordi
 

-----Mensaje original-----
De: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces at ripe.net> en nombre de Tim Chown <tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Responder a: <tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Fecha: lunes, 15 de mayo de 2017, 12:21
Para: Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan at go6.si>
CC: <ipv6-wg at ripe.net>
Asunto: Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document - draft v.2 for review.

    Hi,
    
    > On 13 May 2017, at 18:41, Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan at go6.si> wrote:
    > 
    > On 13/05/2017 10:16, Jens Link wrote:
    >> Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan at go6.si> writes:
    >>> Draft version 2 is now available for reading at
    >>> https://sinog.si/docs/draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v2.pdf
    >> 
    >> I like but I don't see it happening.
    >> 
    >> 1. Stable Addresses - Data protection people will have a hart attack
    >>   when they read this. As will many customers. Don't get me wrong I
    >>   *do* want a stable prefix at home but many people don't. Changing
    >>   addresses gives them some pseudo anonymity and the warm feeling that
    >>   they are not traceable and secure. 
    > 
    > Data protection people will have to learn how technology works and stop
    > breaking IPv6 deployments with enforcing bad practices from IPv4 world.
    > WE dynamically changed IPv4 address because we started running out of
    > them, not to ensure anonimity. That warm fuzzy feeling is made-up
    > collateral damage that was never even a intent ;)
    > 
    > As Jordi mentioned, traceability starts on L7 and it doesn't matter how
    > much you change addresses, you'll be trackable.
    > 
    > For reference, try it on https://panopticlick.eff.org/
    > 
    > Click, change address, click again.
    
    But we should not do anything to preclude privacy-enhancing methods being applied at any layer.
    
    I would argue that the BCOP text should say:
    
    a) ISPs are encouraged to support both stable (persistent) and privacy-oriented (non-persistent) prefixes as options for customers;
    
    b) stable/persistent prefixes are recommended as the default, in the absence of legal requirements to the contrary in any specific country.
    
    I’d also note that the biggest UK IPv6 deployment is a “sticky” /56 to residences; it’s hard for an ISP to guarantee a lifetime stable prefix, but they can take steps to minimise the likelihood of a change being needed.
    
    Tim
    
    
    
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.