That’s different Brian. That is a packet header without a source address. Which “could” change the format (or if one decides at the same time to have the destination address 256 bits long).
I was roughly suggesting using the IPv6 header, as is, and just scramble the source address bits. Dino > On Dec 18, 2021, at 6:05 PM, Hesham ElBakoury <helbako...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > There is also this thesis: A better Internet without IP addresses > https://web.cs.wpi.edu/~cshue/research/dissertation_web.pdf > > Hesham > > >> On Sat, Dec 18, 2021, 2:47 PM Brian E Carpenter >> <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 19-Dec-21 11:34, Dino Farinacci wrote: >> >> From a user perspective, the choice is clear: privacy and security are >> >> top requirements. We know that payload encryption goes a long way, and >> >> hopefully encryption of the transport layer headers will become >> >> dominant so that intermediate nodes will stop meddling and ossifying >> >> the transport layer. But not everything can be encrypted, the IP >> >> addresses for instance, so providing real security and privacy at the >> >> plaintext network layer should be on the list of features to support >> >> user requirements. >> > >> > Definitely agree Tom. >> > >> > But what if we sent a packet where the source address was encrypted? Then >> > you could have global unique addresses (if you wanted them). Of course key >> > exchange and rekeying parameters would have to be setup prior to sending a >> > single packet. >> >> It's called SNA (Sourceless Network Architecture): >> https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-849.pdf >> >> Brian >> >> > Maybe its just simpler to randomize addresses. >> > >> > Dino >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Int-area mailing list >> Int-area@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
