Re: Vehicle's VIN in IPv6.

George Michaelson <ggm+ietf@apnic.net> Thu, 31 March 2011 09:14 UTC

Return-Path: <ggm+ietf@apnic.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4E9728C107 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 02:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.350, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f3vW-cbbL38J for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 02:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp.apnic.net (asmtp.apnic.net [IPv6:2001:dc0:2001:11::199]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1E463A699C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 02:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-54ae.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-54ae.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.84.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by asmtp.apnic.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00139B681F; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:16:03 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: Vehicle's VIN in IPv6.
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: George Michaelson <ggm+ietf@apnic.net>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimV9HG5rb0p3rjb7+dguq+CnxB452tQMn-YnMkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:16:00 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7BAD13E9-6D29-4422-8361-7D3461D0BA91@apnic.net>
References: <5C4A2B87ED124653A9BDEDAC14D6F2C8@sparrow> <AANLkTintFks2OmnfcnUKah8omAEHgiY8BzVhCxL=bD99@mail.gmail.com> <C53621C2-41A0-4818-8E01-377A5468DD8D@apnic.net> <AANLkTimV9HG5rb0p3rjb7+dguq+CnxB452tQMn-YnMkQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:14:28 -0000

On 31/03/2011, at 11:12 AM, Scott Brim wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:45, George Michaelson <ggm+ietf@apnic.net>; wrote:
>> There is a general model here which will re-occur many many times.
>> 
>> manufacturers have context-specific serial numbers which behave in context like EUI164.
>> 
>> It is reasonable (from their perspective) to ask if there is an address management function which can suit their context, to exploit IPv6. Perhaps a private overlay network for IPSEC trusted remote upload and download. re-blow your SONY TV on any Internet via a trust path homed inside the manufacturer. 'ET call home' models of device management.
> 
> An overlay sure.  One could use IPv6 addresses the way back-to-my-Mac
> does.  But I would like it to be clear that
> 
>  Internet location
> 
> and
> 
>  Endpoint identification for use by applications
> 
> are totally different functions and in the long run everything is
> easier if they are kept separate.

I *think* I'd do a 'no disagree +1' on that, but maybe thats another conversation.

>  It's taken us 20 years to get to
> the point where we might be able to separate them.  Let's help others
> not go through the same learning experience.

Like I said, the conversation is going to happen, and we have to face their expectations. I think its being done individually, industrial sector by sector. My first introduction was the smart whitegoods sector, washing machines and the like. I had no exposure to the car segment but its clear high-value goods attract 'smart' solutions labels like flies to honey.

I don't think "go away" is the right answer. I think "your model has flaws" is closer.

The key message is that if they apply for patents in it (BMW) they clearly see dollar-signs and its very hard to trump money.


-G