On 02/19/2013 12:40 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Le 19/02/2013 18:39, Doug Barton a écrit :
On 02/19/2013 07:40 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Such a concern would be all the more valid if there were a
specification which said 'each vehicle MUST form its IIDs based on
their VINs'. But this is not the case. We are not trying for
such a definitive document.
We are certain that some vehicles will never use this VIN-based
addressing scheme. At that point, someone receiving a packet with
a certain source address will never know whether that packet is
from a vehicle or from something else. A reversal of the IP into a
number will never be sure to be a VIN.
But the fact that _some_ of them may be VINs make it a potential
source of data mining, which should be avoided if at all possible.
Data mining should be avoided if possible. The methods proposed are not
final, and they should be improved.
What the replies so far have said is that they should not be done at all.
I would like to add about data mining.
Outside the VIN discussion, it is already possible to not use Privacy
Addresses.
The fact that it's possible for people to voluntarily configure their
system to be less private doesn't have anything to do with creating a
system to tie VINs and IIDs that the user will not be able to opt out
of. There are valid reasons not to use privacy addresses, there are no
good reasons to do the latter at all, and many reasons that you shouldn't.
I snipped the rest of your argument along this line because it falls
into the "faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions" fallacy.
Rejecting VIN-based addresses just because of privacy aspects is
debatable, IMHO.
Any argument to the effect that there should be a way to tie together
VINs and IIDs should come with sufficient justification to overcome the
privacy concerns that have been almost universally expressed by a wide
variety of posters (at least twice now). I haven't seen such a
justification.
There is no reason that manufacturers cannot keep their own mapping
of VIN to IID, and making this process NON-standard (that is, not
documenting a standard way to do it) will slightly decrease the value
of that data, although wouldn't necessarily help the Ferrari-nee-Fiat
problem. :)
I agree. Manufacturers may indeed keep their own mapping VIN-to-IID, or
other VIN-to-prefix mappings. This would not be visible to Internet.
Then the problem is solved, full stop.
Doug
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
