> -----Original Message----- > From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Alexandru Petrescu
> Well they're different than Ethernet interfaces. One could have > several > Ethernet interfaces in a single car. And, cars have their globally > unique space of identifiers which is not EUI-48. > > When one tries to make an IPv6 addressing architecture for vehicles one > goes into planning which could quickly overcome the space of IPv6. Just out of curiosity, why not use DNS to solve this problem? Isn't that how these things are normally handled? You can use the VIN, or you can use the owner's name/address/etc., along with an added way of indentifying a system or component, to create a number of unique identifiers a car might need. It would be nice if each car had just one, but more than likely, each subsystem will need its own IP address and DNS record. Then you use whatever IPv6 prefix makes sense at the time, possibly dependent on location. The 64-bit (or whatever length) IIDs can be chosen in any of the usual optional ways. Like all IPv6, this does not preclude also using ULAs. But for example, just like OnStar systems are able to do, it will continue to make sense to allow a stable way to reach each car. The DNS approach makes it possible to reuse IIDs for cars in different parts of the world. Or, we can insist that cars have a single IPv6 interface, and that all internal components are addressed in a standard way, using subheaders in the data payload. I just don't think that will fly, though. Bert -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
