On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > > [...] I'm in favor of allowing IPv4 addresses, [...] > > I certainly don't see a point of building a speculative feature for > something like IoT without IPv6 support. Doubly so if it's not clear > how I-o-Things will be identified in practice. > Sorry, mine was not a clearly written email. My justification for allowing IPv4 is not IoT in itself, but the fact that IPv4 is being used today, by the internet-of-things-that-happen-to-be-webservers-in-datacenters. It's not clear to me that whitelisting `127.0.0.1` covers the things that people are already doing, and without non-anecdotal data either way, I'd suggest erring on the side of cautiously continuing to allow the things that implementations allow today. -mike -- Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, @mikewest Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, Germany, Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg, Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores (Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.)
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2015 10:25:14 UTC