[ Moderators note: Post was moderated, either because it was posted by
a non-subscriber, or because it was over 20K.
With the massive amount of spam, it is easy to miss and therefore
delete relevant posts by non-subscribers.
Please fix your subscription addresses. ]

On Tuesday 07 February 2006 15:41, Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:
> No, this would just mean that the client identity would be stored in raw
> octet form instead of "encrypting" the data. It would have no impact on
> anything else that I can see.


Essentially, the concern is that you'd be publishing a stable token
identifying a specific client in the DNS. My counterargument to this
concern is that the client's hostname is also a stable token identifying the
client.

If you are concerned about privacy, you shouldn't be publishing _any_ tokens
that identify the client in the DNS. If you are not concerned about
privacy, in the sense that for some reason you consider the value of putting
your client's contact information into a public registry (the DNS) more
important than keeping your client's identity private, then the fact that you
are publishing two tokens in the DNS (the DUID and the hostname) that
identify your client isn't a problem.


--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: