[117918] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ISP customer assignments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dan White)
Tue Oct 6 09:42:26 2009
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:42:18 -0500
From: Dan White <dwhite@olp.net>
To: Ricky Beam <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <op.u1cya3pptfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 05/10/09 22:53 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:55:35 -0400, Dan White <dwhite@olp.net> wrote:
>> All of the items in the above list are true of DHCP. ...
>
> In an IPv4 world (which is where DHCP lives), it's much MUCH harder to
> track assignments -- I don't share my DHCP logs with anyone, nor does
> anyone send theirs to me. From the perspective of remote systems (ie.
> not on the same network), there is about a 100% chance NAT is involved
> making it near impossible to individually identify a specific machine,
> even if it gets the same address every Tuesday when you're at Starbucks
> for coffee. IPv6 does away with NAT (or it's supposed to); in doing so,
> the veil is removed and everything that had been hidden from site is now
> openly displayed. If the "host" part of your address never changes, then
> you are instantly identifiable everywhere you go, with zero effort,
> forever.
Use random addresses, and change as often as you like. Why depend on
someone else's DHCP server to provide you the addressing uniqueness you
desire?
--
Dan White
BTC Broadband
