not to be pedantic but isn't a mountain lion a puma which apple did already?

well.. point #1 is that the mac address portion of the derived autoconf address can be used to track individual machines. i suppose that's true.. it's a good point. the same is also true (tho to a lesser degree of certainty) of static dhcp leases. on ipv4 the problem is usually mitigated at least from the internet side by using NAT to hide the internal ip address. but ipv6 regardless of dhcp exposes the internal ip address externally. #2 (using the 64 bits to pass a covert message) is silly, imo and i'm actually not understanding how dhcp fixes it. what's to stop you from just using autoconf even in the presence of a dhcp server and if caught, huh, dhcp didn't work? it's an inherent problem to ipv6 that you can imbed messages in an address space as large as 64 (of 128) bits.

sure it does. autoconf is based on the mac address and the subnet as advertised by the router (rtadvd on openbsd) -- the address will always be the same. you really are just making your life difficult.

i agree completely. never said otherwise.

yep. cars are in the same class in that respect as planes. have you seen government buildings, recently? they've all implemented security measures against cars. ditto for marine barracks. it's practical in that case to defend the targets. i guess you could dispense with all the security around airports and just shoot down the planes. but someone probably wouldn't like that.

ha.. i'm united premier 1k. i logged 100,000 miles this year alone. i stand by what i said. it doesn't matter what you can or cannot do *NOW* -- that is irrelevant to the point. i mean come on, think it through. the point isn't about security that's in place. it's about *WHY* we have security for that mode of transport in the first place. yes, cars can cause damage & they are a weapon themselves, but it's a practical impossibility to enforce security. trains cannot be used as weapons and that puts them in the same category as walmart and your local mall. that's my point. OTOH, it is practical to have security at airports and it *DOES* help because, as we all know, planes themselves are potentially very devastating weapons. and as you yourself point out, it's now not possible to use planes in that way -- so it has helped.

the difference with planes is that you can slam them into any target you wish. they're essentially piloted cruise missiles. trains and buses and metro stations are different. while you can blow them up, kill people on them or whatever you can't slam them into an arbitrary target. in that respect a train and the metro are no different than your local mall or walmart, downtown or whatever. and i can't imagine we're going to body scan people going into walmart or any other location where there are lots of people in one place. or maybe we are? hope not.

not sure what didn't work about zfs and snow leopard. i've been using the last package from macosxforge since snow leopard came out.

come on.. bicycle polo (even w/ a folding bicycle) is quite a bit cooler than anything on a segway.

well, if you're an asterisk user and you have a provider who uses the IAX protocol (vitelity, callwithus, or point to point to another server) asterisk will encrypt all IAX channels -- you just have to add encryption=aes128 to the entry in iax.conf. pretty cool actually. it's not really at the level of the end consumer, yet.. but it's slick.