On 02/19/13 15:40, Alexandru Petrescu allegedly 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.
Great. > Outside the VIN discussion, it is already possible to not use Privacy > Addresses. For example, a recent experiment with IPv6 cellular client > shows me that the IPv6 addresses of the smartphone has the IID derived > from a manufacturer's ID. ... > The same for VIN - if a use is found about the conversion of VIN to an > IP address, it is good to build in privacy, in a certain sense. But > it's hard to make sure it's accepted. > > Rejecting VIN-based addresses just because of privacy aspects is > debatable, IMHO. "Here we need a change of approach: Businesses must use their power of innovation to improve the protection of privacy and personal data from the very beginning of the development cycle. Privacy by Design is a principle that is in the interest of both citizens and businesses. Privacy by Design will lead to better protection for individuals, as well as to trust and confidence in new services and products that will in turn have a positive impact on the economy. I have seen some encouraging examples, but much more needs to be done." -- Viviane Reding, Jan 2010 > I think I may need to actually better expose the problem: how to form > IPv6 addresses for vehicles. (yes we know these already exist: DHPCv6, > PRefix Delegation on cellular, stateless autoconf, NAT, NPT, 64share). That would be good. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
