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

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:19:10 -0700

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.

?

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 14:39:27 -0400

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