--- 1/draft-ietf-6man-rfc4941bis-04.txt 2019-12-10 22:13:14.100816165 -0800 +++ 2/draft-ietf-6man-rfc4941bis-05.txt 2019-12-10 22:13:14.148817392 -0800 @@ -1,23 +1,23 @@ IPv6 Maintenance (6man) Working Group F. Gont Internet-Draft SI6 Networks / UTN-FRH Obsoletes: rfc4941 (if approved) S. Krishnan Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson Research -Expires: May 6, 2020 T. Narten +Expires: June 12, 2020 T. Narten IBM Corporation R. Draves Microsoft Research - November 3, 2019 + December 10, 2019 Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6 - draft-ietf-6man-rfc4941bis-04 + draft-ietf-6man-rfc4941bis-05 Abstract Nodes use IPv6 stateless address autoconfiguration to generate addresses using a combination of locally available information and information advertised by routers. Addresses are formed by combining network prefixes with an interface identifier. This document describes an extension that causes nodes to generate global scope addresses with randomized interface identifiers that change over time. Changing global scope addresses over time makes it more @@ -34,21 +34,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on May 6, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on June 12, 2020. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents @@ -483,20 +483,25 @@ created. When updating the preferred lifetime of an existing temporary address, it would be set to expire at whichever time is earlier: the time indicated by the received lifetime or (CREATION_TIME + TEMP_PREFERRED_LIFETIME - DESYNC_FACTOR). A similar approach can be used with the valid lifetime. 3. If the node has not configured any temporary address for the corresponding prefix, the node SHOULD create a new temporary address for such prefix. + Note: + For example, a host might implement prefix-specific policies + such as not configuring temporary addresses for the Unique + Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (ULA) [RFC4193] prefix. + 4. When creating a temporary address, the lifetime values MUST be derived from the corresponding prefix as follows: * Its Valid Lifetime is the lower of the Valid Lifetime of the prefix and TEMP_VALID_LIFETIME * Its Preferred Lifetime is the lower of the Preferred Lifetime of the prefix and TEMP_PREFERRED_LIFETIME - DESYNC_FACTOR. 5. A temporary address is created only if this calculated Preferred @@ -754,22 +759,22 @@ 7. Section 3.2.3 from [RFC4941] was removed, based on the explanation of that very section of RFC4941. 8. All the verified errata for [RFC4941] has been incorporated. 9. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank (in alphabetical order) Brian Carpenter, Tim Chown, Lorenzo Colitti, David Farmer, Tom Herbert, Bob Hinden, Christian Huitema, Dave Plonka, Michael Richardson, Mark - Smith, and Johanna Ullrich for providing valuable comments on earlier - versions of this document. + Smith, Johanna Ullrich, and Timothy Winters, for providing valuable + comments on earlier versions of this document. This document incoporates errata submitted for [RFC4941] by (in alphabetical order) Jiri Bohac and Alfred Hoenes. This document is based on [RFC4941] (a revision of RFC3041). Suresh Krishnan was the sole author of RFC4941. He would like to acknowledge the contributions of the ipv6 working group and, in particular, Jari Arkko, Pekka Nikander, Pekka Savola, Francis Dupont, Brian Haberman, Tatuya Jinmei, and Margaret Wasserman for their detailed comments.