IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: TSVDIR review of draft-ietf-intarea-shared-addressing-issues-02

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Thu, 03 February 2011 01:27 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B5983A679C; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 17:27:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GbwBTgXziWP7; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 17:27:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933D23A66B4; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 17:27:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gxk27 with SMTP id 27so295334gxk.31 for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:30:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=W54nJFMkJ0to/tyrhh8gqTgJIwXiNpqZ/zhq/ZEmN4Q=; b=QXnFsgBN+HNmUtLrJrpFa/cYh9UoJsi2/hzucs8kWIsK8OnrFdlN1B+CFDZiEkYbrq KRIHaHV7iKFHa4N2jpnro+epd2x1+MNGPX5xF6IknPQ+n7iv4lb84hV0gseU6Kkhe3KE bLbLkAaCszEtT1PLcgVOtW4CSULbZJ112t9XU=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=UE9vFebyl3YhBBirk34OM0tTgsIOu/6oRbphKDpckZK7mWpzgZzOEmS0uLqmnHRJlK IbEYacRCtulPxhVsqk67U2y0rrd2VG1qmEZMCCKUby0Tx/oYORppYz7iVZAuOZw32avt N6jhgvT3+Mw/p8mkMu/ypZjNfdPCeuivt4vx8=
Received: by 10.100.8.9 with SMTP id 9mr6391208anh.120.1296696633223; Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.123] (61-128-17-190.fibertel.com.ar [190.17.128.61]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e24sm289585ana.22.2011.02.02.17.30.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:30:32 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Fernando Gont <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D4A051C.1060501@gont.com.ar>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 22:30:04 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Subject: Re: TSVDIR review of draft-ietf-intarea-shared-addressing-issues-02
References: <4D48B4EA.20503@isi.edu> <4D490FED.6060303@gont.com.ar> <4D4996AE.8060302@isi.edu> <4D49FF33.7030107@gont.com.ar> <4D4A0017.6050401@isi.edu> <4D4A03CE.9020105@gont.com.ar>
In-Reply-To: <4D4A03CE.9020105@gont.com.ar>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "tsv-ads@tools.ietf.org" <tsv-ads@tools.ietf.org>, draft-ietf-intarea-shared-addressing-issues@tools.ietf.org, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, TSV Dir <tsv-dir@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 01:27:13 -0000

On 02/02/2011 10:24 p.m., Fernando Gont wrote:
>> On 2/2/2011 5:04 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
>> ...
>>>> At the least, it's worth noting that geolocation is already broken by
>>>> tunnels, and that IP addressing does not ensure geographic proximity
>>>> before attributing breakage on NATs or other sharing.
>>>
>>> Tunnels need not break geo-location. -- They do not masquerade the
>>> source address. Or am I missing something?
>>
>> When I tunnel using an ISI address, whomever sees my address thinks I'm
>> in California.
> [..]

And one might argue that, in this type of scenario, this "breakeage" of
geo-location might, in some cases, be desirable.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email