Re: ICR "Unique Identifiers"

In article <D7B0B305-33EF-4999-A9EA-DD7163C9411C-BFib/[email protected]>, Ian 
Batten <igb-BFib/[email protected]> writes
>>> This statement in the document is false, as far as I can see from a technical
>>> perspective:
>>>
>>> "ICRs therefore provide the unique identifier to distinguish between different
>>> users of a shared IP address"
>>
>> I'm sure that this is about identifying the users behind carrier-grade-NAT.
>
>I agree.
>
>As one of my students asked after a lecture on, co-incidentally, the problems
 >caused for law enforcement by CG NAT, "wouldn’t it be better for the
 >government to spend the money encouraging IPv6?"

You have to persuade a whole range of international mobile phone
handset and infrastructure designers/manufacturers. People were talking 
seriously about the need for IPv6 for mobiles and broadband back in at 
least 2007:

http://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/losangeles2007/node/36.html

...especially the final presentation, but not much has happened.
-- 
Roland Perry