On Apr 7, 2013, at 11:07 AM, joel jaeggli <joe...@bogus.com> wrote: >> So that possibly makes sense internally to the car, although possibly not. >> It doesn't make a lot of sense to me between cars, except perhaps in the >> most restricted applications. When you talk about capacity constrained RF >> channels, it sounds like you're talking about car-to-car traffic, or >> car-to-infrastructure traffic. But this constrained port mapping protocol >> sounds way too restrictive for either of those contexts. > neither 802.11p or generic wifi are particularly capacity constrained.
Right, I have subsequently learned that in fact there is work being done to use wireless inside the car to save on wiring. This probably still has privacy implications, since the RF shielding on the car is likely not good enough to completely prevent snooping, but if the identifiers being used are this constrained, it may not be a significant issue. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
