Subject: draft-ietf-ipngwg-default-addr-select-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:39:32 -0600

I strongly object to Temporary Addresses being preferred over Public
Addresses in source address selection.

The reason is that most communications of IPv6 will not be on the Internet
but on Intranets.  The default should reflect that reality.

And a web server should be using a public address that can last for weeks.

I also object to the notion that temporary addresses and why they exist is
the norm.  

regards,
/jim
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 16:10:43 +0100

In your previous mail you wrote:

   
   
=> there are two issues:
 - what are the defaults?
 = how to change them?
Of course if the second issue is solved then the first one becomes
a matter of taste/personal choice of implementers. Unfortunately
if there are some nice policy hooks they don't apply to the
temporary/public choice (or the home/care-of one). I strongly
suggest to add in the document some reasonable hooks (reasonable =
something which can be set in the context of applications, not
only a setsockopt) for this kind of policies...

Regards

[email-masked]

BTW I share Jim's opinion about temporary addresses.

---

From: Charlie Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 08:59:59 -0800

Hello,

I'd like to suggest that all addresses are temporary.  And I'd like
further to suggest that an application should be allowed to pick
some of the attributes of the IPv6 address it uses -- for instance,
whether it's a "well-known" ("Public") address or one that is
more evanascent and evaporates after the application is done.
This application _might_ be a window manager, for instance, so
that all applications running in a window inherit the "privacy"
attributes (including address evanescence) of the window itself.
And so on.

These are not protocol attributes, but protocols can be built to
impede their implementation.  I am afraid that exactly such a
thing is happening now.

Regards,
Charlie P.

PS. For instance, it probably isn't any longer possible for an
      application to get a new IPv6 address if it feels like it needs one.