[166412] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ipv6 and geolocation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Abley)
Tue Oct 22 15:22:09 2013
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <CAA5Ek4f9JXTKaQUVhTz-2=x+mZX1x1rp_Tne=bv6Zqze_fLvPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:21:56 -0400
To: Blair Trosper <blair.trosper@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2013-10-22, at 15:16, Blair Trosper <blair.trosper@gmail.com> wrote:
> Everyone loves IPv6, and it's a fantastic technology. However, I've =
been
> pondering a few quirks of v6, including the low priority of PTR,
Not sure what that means, but...
> but I have a question I want to throw out there:
>=20
> Do you think IPv6 geolocatoin (GeoIP) will ever be viable?
To me it seems like an easier problem to solve than IPv4. There's no =
historical assignment swamp. Subnets are of fixed size. Many/most =
organisations who receive a direct assignment will never need a second.
> If so, when do you think this will happen?
As soon as enough people using geo-located services start doing so over =
v6.
Joe
