Hiya, I think there's a missing requirement in section 5. SAVI is mentioned as an example of an existing mechanism, but since that was developed, MAC-address randomisation schemes have been widely deployed (on some hosts) for very good reasons. I would assert you ought therefore state a requirement that new SAV mechanisms MUST NOT invalidate modern privacy-enhancing mechanisms (such as MAC-address randomisation). Thanks, S. On 03/01/2025 19:42, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Source Address Validation in
Intra-domain and Inter-domain Networks WG (savnet) to consider the following
document: - 'Source Address Validation in Intra-domain Networks Gap Analysis,
Problem Statement, and Requirements'
<draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement-09.txt> as Informational
RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2025-01-17. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document provides the gap analysis of existing intra-domain
source address validation mechanisms, describes the fundamental
problems, and defines the requirements for technical improvements.
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list -- ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-announce-leave@xxxxxxxx
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
