On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:16, George Michaelson <ggm+i...@apnic.net> wrote: >> 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.
Someone (IAB? ISOC?) needs to publish something to the world about separation of functions, and the perils of mixing locators and identifiers. We can help write it. > 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. Hadn't thought of that. Hm. Scott -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
