Bob Hinden <bob.hin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have read the emails and the draft
<draft-lee-randomized-macaddr-ps-01>. I am not clear what the goal of the BOF
is.
> Could the proponents state it clearly?
I can't speak for the proponents, but at the simplest, one could add:
"how can we do X if the MAC cannot be used as identity"
> • LAN gateway NAPT forwarding - (PRESENTER TBD)
> • Static NAPT policies - (PRESENTER TBD)
> • Persistent DHCP IP address assignments - (PRESENTER TBD)
> • Device-to-user or group association for malware protection - (PRESENTER
TBD)
> • Device-to-user or group association for parental controls - (PRESENTER
TBD)
> • Device-to-user or group association to restrict or authorize unwanted
> or unverified device connections to the LAN - (PRESENTER TBD)
I don't get the NAPT issue though.
The NAPT issues are because DHCP gave the device a different IP(v4), right?
If you solve persistent DHCP, then you solve those, don't you?
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
