I first want to thank Dave who took the time to read and comment on my draft and to discuss the problems associated with it. Based on some offline discussions with Dave, I have changed this document to better address the current issues with RFC 4941 which are actually related to differences in interpretation of the wording used in the that document. In many cases the wording used gives implementations the choice of how best to accomplish the goal which can lead to bad choices being made which negates the purpose of the document. This draft is thus an update to the Privacy Extension document and also, because it does not allow a node to generate and use an IID based on a MAC address, an update to one section of RFC 4862 which pertains to this.
In this document an approach is recommend that doesn't make use MAC addresses in the generation of public addresses. It does, in fact, endorse the use other approaches that aren't based on the use of MAC addresses in the generation of public addresses. Public addresses can be valid forever but it is recommended that, for privacy purposes, a node not make use of public addresses. The definition of public addresses here is the same as what Dave explained in his last responses to the people on this list, i.e., the addresses that need to have DNS records. In my opinion, these addresses are more useful for servers than other nodes. I appreciate your support and any and all comments that you might proffer. Thank you, Best, Hosnieh
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
