Subject: Re: Centrally assigned "ULAs" for automotives and other, environments

From: Ray Hunter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:37:59 +0200

+1

Assignment of PI address space is orthogonal to how that space is 
advertised on the Public Internet, and is also orthogonal to security, 
and we should keep it that way as far as possible IMHO.

If you're going to define one or more system level interfaces at the 
edge of your "secure" car network, then I humbly suggest that the 
industry define a proper API for each one (including well-defined 
commands, version control, and conformance testing).

regards,
RayH
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:13:45 +1300
> From: Brian E Carpenter<[email-masked]>
> To: Dan Wing<[email-masked]>
> Cc: '6man'<[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: Centrally assigned "ULAs" for automotives and other
> 	environments
> Message-ID:<[email-masked]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>    
<snip>
>   I would think that you would actually want an
> application server at the boundary, acting for example as a data
> collector on the ULA side and as a data provider on the "uplink"
> side.
<snip>

> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 17:51:13 -0700
> From: "Dan Wing"<[email-masked]>
> To: "'Manfredi, Albert E'"<[email-masked]>,	"'Roland
> 	Bless'"<[email-masked]>,	"'Joel M. Halpern'"
> 	<[email-masked]>
> Cc: '6man'<[email-masked]>
> Subject: RE: Centrally assigned "ULAs" for automotives and other
> 	environments
> Message-ID:<03b901cc7e41$e3cda160$ab68e420$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
<snip>
> It's too bad computer science is not a science, or we would actually
> look at the past, and this mistakes that were made, to build tomorrow's
> systems.  ALGs were a mistake.
>
> -d
>