Over-utilisation of v6 neighbour slots

Benedikt Stockebrand bs at stepladder-it.com
Sat Oct 26 21:18:15 CEST 2013

Hi Daniel and list,

Daniel Roesen <dr at cluenet.de> writes:

> Identification via IP address is the least point of
> concern to me (as long as the host part doesn't use a GUID of course).

not quite---as soon as we fix the more prominent problems, aggressive
trackers will resort to whatever alternative we leave them.

Unless we (as "the IT industry") get into a way of thinking where we fix
these things before they blow up in everybody's face, there will be no
improvement with this rather general problem.

> But making a lot of fuzz about prefix randomization like some German
> ISPs do in the press nicely distracts from the real powerful
> identification methods you mentioned - which are widely used.

The reason why ISPs make such a fuss about prefix randomization is
because they want to distract from the fact that they want to sell
static addresses at a premium, and preferably to business customers
only.  This isn't about privacy, but about protecting established
business models.

If they were so serious about privacy, why don't they give their
business customers an option for---additional---dynamic prefixes?

Aside from that, giving customers dynamic addresses, and denying them
static ones, are two different horses.  With IPv6 it isn't a fundamental
problem to give people both, so they can use dynamic addresses for
connections to the outside and static addresses for services they run
themselves.  But if you think about all the business ramifications of
people actually running services themselves, then it should be
immediately obvious that there are powerful parties involved who will
put significant effort into preventing this.



			 Business Grade IPv6
		    Consulting, Training, Projects

Benedikt Stockebrand, Dipl.-Inform.        http://www.stepladder-it.com/

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list