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