Dear Stephane,
So far as I understood, I asked some help to share my idea to IETF in right
way.
Jordi answered me and it was "support"=help. It would be rude if I said
nothing.
1. Again, it is not about privacy. When you work with IPv6 address, nobody
knows that it was you, like with numbers of cell phones (if you did not
share information).
3. It is important in two ways: identification of device and possibility to
make access only for given device.
6. I have written qualification dissertation about it = 80 pages. However,
I can not translate right now, because of you.
Please, say hello for people, which you do not know. We are here to discuss
but not only criticize (it is too simple).
Regards, Alexander.
2016-11-21 16:58 GMT+03:00 Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer(_at_)nic(_dot_)fr>:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 04:49:02PM +0300,
Alexander Nevalennyy <avnevalenniy(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote
a message of 45 lines which said:
Thank you for your opinion and fast support, Jordi.
Jordi tried to patiently explain, I'm not sure you can call his
message "support".
1. I am not sure that about privacy. Nobody need your IP while you do not
do something wrong.
Usual argument from the police ("if you want privacy, it means you are
a criminal trying to hide something"). You will have a hard time
convincing people to buy it.
3. I meant usage of SLAAC for all ip-addresses (now it is optional).
And why? I mean, servers typically use static non-SLAAC addresses. Why
should they change?
Link is below:
http://www.slideshare.net/phdays/ipv6-35204784
6 slides can hardly be regarded as a proposal worth of IETF time.
Should I try to write to WG called ipsecme?
Please first learn to respond to emails (instead of starting a new
thread each time).