Francis Dupont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > Ok, privacy, yes. > > => please read the last update of RFC 3041 before to get things from > 3041 which are not in it...
So I suppose there's draft, a pointer would help. Far from me any intention that you imply, sorry. > Alberto mentioned that not necessarily the IMEI should be coded > but a hash of it, periodically updated starting from a nonce. > > => I can't see a reason to do that when RFC 3041 is supported. > Or do you mean we can replace the MAC address by the IMEI for the > seed? No-no. > > In addition, it might not always be unique... > > IMEI not being unique? That's bad, again. Then it's probably true > that some id's are more unique than other id's. > > => IMEI is unique according to 3GPP/ETSI standards. Ok, fact is that those future wireless phones things have not yet agreed among themselves who uses what as unique ID. This narrows the option of coding IMEIs into addresses to in fact coding IMEIs for 3GPP of ETSI into addresses. > What are the other identifiers in the GSM/3GPP/UMTS? Phone number? > > => none, the hardware ID is the IMEI. Others (IMSI/phone number) are > private... Ok, how about TMSI dynamically assigned by a VLR. Like an RCoA in an HMIPv6 domain. I guess it would not fit because it changes when moving into another geographical region. Then how about MSISDN, whose correspondence with the IMSI is kept by the HLR. HLR is a sort of super-VLR, only one of them per operator (there are several VLRs per operator). MSISDN is not so private as IMSI, only HLR knows the correspondence. So one can consider it overcomes IMSI's limitations. I think there's also MSRN but know nothing about it more than it's used for MSC-MSC communication. And I don't know what MSC means. > Would an IMT2000 identifier be better adapted, since it has a wider > reach, more neutral. > > => it seems the IMT2000 identifier would be the IMEI. Ah, some agreement, finally. Note though another difference between 802 id's and all those discussed above: the above identifiers identify the terminal itself, but not the other end of the communication at L2. I mean a base station has neither IMEI/IMSI/etc, and if it's identified by something it's certainly not the same kind of id as the one for the phone. Alex -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
