Subject: Re: why IPv6 is bad, No, SMTP is IPv4, Was: SMTP and IPv6 Date: Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 08:05:29AM -0400 Quoting Phillip Hallam-Baker (phill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx): > So, about defeating traffic analysis... > > I really don't understand why there is this fetish for keeping the IP > address the same from endpoint to endpoint. In 1985, the end points > typically weighed 800lb and were not likely to move. A user was not going > to switch networks during a call. Connections more complicated than HTTPS will break more often when being subjected to middle boxes. We've bred an entire generation of programmers who believe it is HTTPS/IP and that nothing else works. This because the middle boxes break protocol innovation, forcing people to implement workarounds and reinventing the wheel over HTTPS. I think the world deserves better. And it is so bloody inelegant! > Today, being able to keep the transport connection going when the network > connection changes is table stakes for new proposals. And that means the IP > addresses are going to be in a state of flux. If you don't want pervasive > surveillance knowing who is talking to whom, you want to obliterate any > information that might help an attacker. And I want application protocols to be able to do that switch, and evolve without having to ask middle boxes permission. -- Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina MN-1334-RIPE SA0XLR +46 705 989668 Are we THERE yet? My MIND is a SUBMARINE!!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
