Yes, but DEC decided that was a bad idea and stopped doing it in phase V. Phase iV stared pre-bridging where the extend of the LAN was only the directly connected devices.
These days LANs are huge and I am simply asking about where the IEEE who are the design authority for Ethernet approve of MAC address randomisation? Stewart > On 23 Sep 2020, at 15:02, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[email protected]> wrote: > > In another century, DECnet phase 4 was also changing the MAC address (and if > not mistaken IBM SNA also) but flipping the universal/local bit of the MAC > address > > -éric > > From: Int-area <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > on behalf of Stewart Bryant <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Date: Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 12:38 > To: Andy Smith <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP > applications > > So I am curious, and probably out of touch. > > MAC addresses are supposed to be unique hardware device addresses that > ultimately come from a registry administered by IEEE and are supposed to be > allocated exactly once to one hardware entity. > > Is MAC address randomisation something that IEEE approve of, in which case > how does the registry work, or are we at risk of working on a problem that > results in an interSDO dispute? > > - Stewart > > > > >> On 22 Sep 2020, at 21:22, Andy Smith <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Yiu- >> >> I’d like to help here. Is the problem that residential devices can’t be >> reliably tracked for purposes of policy enforcement? Or is it an IP >> address depletion issue? >> >> I noticed iOS 14 does allow for disabling of random MAC addresses. >> >> Andy >> >> >> Sent with emacs for iOS >> >> >>> On Sep 22, 2020, at 15:50, Lee, Yiu <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi team, >>> >>> We proposed a BoF. The agenda is in >>> https://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/109-Agenda.md >>> <https://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/109-Agenda.md> and >>> the proposal is in >>> https://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/BoF-Proposal-20200918.md >>> >>> <https://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/BoF-Proposal-20200918.md>. >>> You can also find the draft here >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-randomized-macaddr-ps-01 >>> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-randomized-macaddr-ps-01>. >>> >>> At this stage, we are looking for inputs for more use cases and interests >>> of working together in this domain. Please post your comments in the >>> mailing list. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Int-area mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area >>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area> >> _______________________________________________ >> Int-area mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area >> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
