On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Roland Bless <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jeroen, > > Am 29.09.2011 09:30, schrieb Jeroen Massar: >> You do realize that the RIRs are providing exactly what you describe? :) >> >> - globally guaranteed unique (due to registry) large address prefixes >> >> Which is why from my information ULA-C has also been abandoned, as it >> already is something that has already been resolved. > > Ok, fine. We could use that _if_ the RIR policies allow unconnected use, > but David Farmer pointed out that some policies may forbid that. I just > figured out that RIPE's "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy" > says in 2.6: > "To 'assign' means to delegate address space to an ISP or End User for > specific use within the Internet infrastructure they operate." > I'm not sure that one could denote the internal on-board network > of a car as Internet infrastructure operated by ...?!
it runs the 'internet protocol' right? in all seriousness, why would/should we (rir/internet community) care if you use the resource on a link between you and your mom or between you and comcast/telia/etc? my stance is that we ought not care, we should assign the resources to folks who can put them to use. we may have to help in the educational process a bit, but hiding behind 'private addressing' and 'we never want to ... oops, we connected to the internet!' just isn't working today. >> What makes me wonder though, is why you would want to have different >> prefixes in different locations that never ever ever will talk to each >> other directly using those prefixes. > > As already said, maybe not in the car scenario but in others. > However, history told us that address uniqueness is preferable in most > cases. addresses from the RIR == unique. There is no registry for ULA-C... >> Though it would be a cool idea, dynamically assigning addresses to >> random components in a car where one actually needs to also then >> maintain a registry of which components are where, will effectively mean >> that there will be a DNS server too of sorts to map 'engine' to >> 2001:db8:.....x and the left-mirror to 2001:db8:... Will be a lot of fun >> to build I guess, but debugging that will be horrible and overly >> complex. Then again, some times that is the fun in things right ;) > > The car on-board network requires usually real-time control guarantees, > so having too much dynamics and several indirections/mappings is > probably not so suitable. just don't pull the "Connexion by Boeing" model of every vehicle is numbered in the exact same way :) from the exact same netblock... (see preso from ietf plenary ~8yrs ago? or maybe 6 in Minneapolis?) -chris -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
