Hello, I vote for B. I think it makes sense for applications get privacy by default and applications that need the more persistent addresses will explicitly ask for one.
Cheers, Jonne. -- Jonne Soininen Renesas Mobile Tel: +358 40 527 4634 E-mail: jonne.soini...@renesasmobile.com On 3/27/12 10:33 AM, "Brian Haberman" <br...@innovationslab.net> wrote: >All, > The chairs would like to get a sense of the working group on >changing the current (defined 3484) model of preferring public addresses >over privacy addresses during the address selection process. RFC 3484 >prefers public addresses with the ability (MAY) of an implementation to >reverse the preference. The suggestion has been made to reverse that >preference in 3484bis (prefer privacy addresses over public ones). >Regardless, the document will allow implementers/users to reverse the >default preference. > > Please state your preference for one of the following default >options : > >A. Prefer public addresses over privacy addresses > >B. Prefer privacy addresses over public addresses > >Regards, >Brian, Bob, & Ole >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >ipv6@ietf.org >Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >-------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
