Re: [Pals] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: (with COMMENT)

Spencer,

Yes, that’s a good improvement, in fact it would be even better to say:

  This problem has recently become more serious for a number of
   reasons.  Firstly, due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet
   MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned by the IEEE
   Registration Authority Committee (RAC). Any Ethernet headers with
addresses that start with either of these two values can be misidentified
as IP packet headers.

We plan to do an update incorporating last call and IESG comments following
the telechat.

Thanks,
Andy


On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 2:19 PM, Spencer Dawkins <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: No Objection
>
> 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-pals-ethernet-cw/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> In this text,
>
>   This problem has recently become more serious for a number of
>    reasons.  Firstly, due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet
>    MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned by the IEEE
>    Registration Authority Committee (RAC).  Secondly, concerns over
>    privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomization which
>    assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy.  Random assignment
>    results in addresses starting with one of these two values one time
>    in eight.
>
> the problem caused by the second case is explained well, but the problem
> caused
> by the first reason is not. Would it be correct to say
>
>   This problem has recently become more serious for a number of
>    reasons.  Firstly, due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet
>    MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned by the IEEE
>    Registration Authority Committee (RAC).
>
> Any addresses that start with either of these two values can be
> misidentified.
>
>    Secondly, concerns over
>    privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomization which
>    assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy.  Random assignment
>    results in addresses starting with one of these two values one time
>    in eight.
>
> ?
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Pals mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals