Le 01/04/2013 00:39, Manfredi, Albert E a écrit :
Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
I meant to say that this VIN mapping to an IPv6 address may be
useful not only to newly manufactured vehicles, but also to old
vehicles.
Honestly, I've never much liked any scheme that attempts to hardcode
anything about the interface into an IP address that way. And the
more I think about it, the less sense it makes to use such a scheme
especially in a car. Where you really can't have one interface
address for the car anyway. I'm much more inclined to wonder why a
car should be any different from, say, your set of laptop PCs,
tablets, and smartphones.
In some sense it's the same - it's also a group of computers with
distinct IP stacks on them. In other sense it's different - in a car
there's often one 'representative' of these computers whereas a
conference room of laptops has no particular representative.
A VIN is a fine unique identifier to use in the DNS, though. And
potentially other similar unique identifiers for different
components of each car. E.g., the DNS could have
vitalreadings.<vin#>.car entries, or electicalsystem.<vin#>.car, or
enginediagnostics.<vin#>.car, or numerous entries to identify an
ever growing number interfaces that a car should be expected to
sprout, in the coming decades.
How you find the moving car from the DNS entry would be same as for
any other mobile client. Using the same set of solutions.
Right. There would be a need for dynamic DNS updates for this to work.
This would work when little IP mobility is involved. It would be fine
to consider vehicles constantly connected with eg LTE, and have the
services formed by DNS names, and maybe from VINs.
This Router sold by the third-party needs to know what IPv6
addresses are or should there be in the vehicle.
With IPv4 it was all simple: just use always the same NAT space
192.168.0.0. Example deployments are from a number of vehicles.
Granted, with the IPv4 address space, anything inside the car would
be assigned a RFC 1918 address, and would have to go through a NAT.
And then for global connectivity, systems inside the car would be
required to initiate any session. You can do functionally the same
thing with IPv6. Use ULAs for anything inside the car, and then use
RFC 6296 Network Prefix Translation and mobile IP.
Perhaps you have the car acquire a temporary IPv6 address based on
its location? Each car is assigned a temporary /64 prefix from the
local wireless ISP? And the DNS dynamically follows the car that
way?
I wouldnt think this could work - too many DNS updates... precisely as
too many route updates wouldnt work either (I mean in large deployments).
But that's just supposition. It may be different, I dont know.
Alex
Bert
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
