Subject: [v6ops] Alissa Cooper's Yes on draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability-06: (with COMMENT)

From: "Alissa Cooper" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 09:27:31 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability-06: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 3: s/which is only available in 3GPP release 10/which has been
made available as of 3GPP release 10/

Section 9.1: 
- May be better not to presume that operators do things "to avoid
liability" - I don't think that particular sentence is necessary here.
- I was surprised not to see a note here about interaction between this
kind of host tracking and MAC address randomization, which I assume makes
tracking harder independently of the whether the recommendations in this
document are followed. But is it not discussed because operators who feel
they need these kind of logs also prohibit MAC randomization?

---

From: Lorenzo Colitti <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 13:03:26 +0900

Alissa,

thanks for the comments. We've made changes in -07 to address them.

> made available as of 3GPP release 10/

Changed to "3GPP release 10 or above".

> liability" - I don't think that particular sentence is necessary here.

Er, oops. Changed to "attribute liability", which is what we meant.

> they need these kind of logs also prohibit MAC randomization?

Agreed. Added a mention of MAC address randomization just after "ongoing
efforts to improve the privacy of DHCPv6 (RFC7844)". That's the most
obvious place, since MAC address randomization is discussed in depth in RFC
7844.

Cheers,
Lorenzo