Subject: Re: Review comments on IPv6 for Second and Third Generation Cellu lar Hosts

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:34:10 -0400

[playing catchup]

>   > Does this (paraphrased) assessment seem correct? I wouldn't 
>   > want 3GPP to
>   > mandate a behaviour that they would believe contributed to 
>   > identity privacy
>   > but, based on some other procedure, did not.

> => But the person tracking would have to know 
> that the host is a 3GPP host.

Isn't this fairly trivial todo? I.e., the cellphone will likely have
an IPv6 address assigned out of a address block that is widely-known
to belong to a carrier providing 3G IPv6 service. Right?

Thomas
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Karim El-Malki (ERA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 11:56:49 +0200

> to belong to a carrier providing 3G IPv6 service. Right?

Depends if that carrier only provides 3G IPv6 service. It may provide
fixed and 3G service out of the same block, where the assignment is
done differently in the fixed and wireless parts. Also, it may provide
IPv6 service to corporate users which use prefixes belonging to their
fixed corporate network. It's true that it doesn't provide privacy
in all cases, but it's not necessarily a trivial thing to find out
if a host is a 3GPP host.

/Karim