[188667] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Apr 11 18:04:48 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPkb-7AjMyjBcHWB3NgmnS9iW=8epi8EKwiDkNrtK3KWi5ZH7A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:02:07 -0700
To: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 12:01 , Baldur Norddahl =
<baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> On 11 April 2016 at 20:15, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
>=20
>> Oh, heck, you know better than that. You can put in all the flags =
and
>> warnings you want, but if it returns an address, nitwits will show up
>> at the address with guns.
>>=20
>> Bodies of water probably are the least bad alternative. I wonder if
>> they're going to hydrolocate all of the unknown addresses, or only =
the
>> ones where they get publically shamed.
>>=20
>=20
> They should stop giving out coordinates on houses period. Move the
> coordinate to the nearest street intersection if you need to be that
> precise (I would prefer nearest town square). Anything more than that
> should be illegal.
>=20
> Regards,
>=20
> Baldur
The thing I find particularly amusing having just looked up my own IP =
addresses is the following:
1. My addresses are tied to my actual address in whois.
2. That is not the address linked to in any of the GeoIP databases =
I know how to check.
3. The address is only a few blocks away, but where an ambiguity is =
provided, it is sufficient to cover
most of the city of San Jose, including my house of course.
Needless to say, it=E2=80=99s not confidence inspiring. I might look to =
see whose house it does send me to later
if I feel inclined, just for amusement.
Owen
