Dear David Conrad, Thanks for sharing the useful information! You have a good point. I agree that IP address is used for routing and non-electronic items can use any of myriad identifier schemes. However, let’s reverse the question – why non-electronic items couldn’t use IPv6 addresses as identifiers? I can see some benefits of using IPv6 addresses as identifiers for some of the products - unique, routeable, verifiable and secure. For example, a pack of medicine assigned an IPv6 address. When you scan it, it looks up that IPv6 address and returns the information about the medicine. With secure routing like RPKI, only the company produce that medicine can announce that IPv6 address and returns the correct information. If all companies use IPv6 as product identifiers, we don’t need many identifier schemes. The future Internet of Things will be simpler. We can discuss more at APNIC 58. Best regards, Guangliang (Benny) ________________________________ From: David Conrad via SIG-policy <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2024 5:50 AM To: jordi.palet--- via SIG-policy <[email protected]> Subject: [sig-policy] Re: prop-161-v001: Using IPv6 for Internet of Things (IoT) -- correct version
Hi, Back during the IPng ‘discussions', I once said (in support of variable length addressing) that there was no fixed amount of address space that address allocation policy couldn’t consume. A case in point... On Aug 5, 2024, at 2:09 AM, Bertrand Cherrier via SIG-policy <[email protected]> wrote: A new proposal "prop-161-v001: Using IPv6 for Internet of Things (IoT)" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. […] In some of the cases, the IoT industry needs to assign IPv6 to electronic smart devices as well as non-electronic items. This seems quite at odds with how Internet routing works. The non-electronic items include company products and assets. IPv6 addresses will be used as universally compatible identifiers for these non-electronic items for the purpose of identification, verification, and tracing. This is not what IP addresses are for. Overloading universal identification onto IP addresses would needlessly complicate address allocation, routing and routing software, etc., and consume address space for no useful end, at least in terms of use on the Internet. It is a bit difficult for APNIC Hostmasters to evaluate such IPv6 requests without a clear policy to allow allocating IPv6 addresses to non-electronic items. IP addresses are endpoints of IP communication, not universal identifiers. Non-electronic items have no need for IP addresses and could, instead, use any of myriad identifier schemes (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unique_identifiers) Regards, -drc
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
