| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
From: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAPKkNb4g++KaXmJ9Y5N-0J2Dt+P7Yn_xMvxcr7viThh4rf6rMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 08:21:19 -0700
To: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:23 AM, "Constantine A. Murenin" =
<mureninc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why is there no way to do any of this?
>>=20
>> Because it is impractical to assume an IP address can be mapped
>> uniquely to a geolocation.
>=20
> Why is it impractical? If I have a server in Germany and in Quebec,
> why would it be impractical to have the logic in place such that
> European visitors would be contacting the server in Germany, and
> visitors from US/Canada -- the one in Quebec?
There is not "no way to do any of this." People do it all the time. =
They do it using anycast, which requires a certain amount of network =
build, or they do it using source-address databases, which have a =
certain amount of ridiculous FAIL. Are you actually asking why there's =
no way to do it perfectly at no cost?
-Bill
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |