IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: The "nomap" Network Identifier Suffix

Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> Wed, 27 November 2013 20:27 UTC

Return-Path: <eburger@standardstrack.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B95E61AC441 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:27:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.777
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.777 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4aHgI7nG5pK5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:27:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from biz104.inmotionhosting.com (biz104.inmotionhosting.com [74.124.215.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72011A1F7D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:27:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ip68-100-74-215.dc.dc.cox.net ([68.100.74.215]:51820 helo=[192.168.15.104]) by biz104.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <eburger@standardstrack.com>) id 1Vllhe-00088x-20 for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:27:23 -0800
From: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7A36DFF3-4465-4BE8-97AC-49A7149FB720"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Message-Id: <18D401BF-E79A-4718-BF35-5BAB68772CC5@standardstrack.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
Subject: Re: The "nomap" Network Identifier Suffix
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:27:17 -0500
References: <20131127045226.74559.qmail@joyce.lan> <B939184E-AE28-44CE-A6E5-80EDB34E32CD@nominum.com> <20131127202146.7B308AE4166@rock.dv.isc.org>
To: IETF-Discussion Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <20131127202146.7B308AE4166@rock.dv.isc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - biz104.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: biz104.inmotionhosting.com: authenticated_id: eburger+standardstrack.com/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:27:26 -0000

More of a reason for it to be at the 802.11 level, not SSID. Say what we mean, not just a hint.

On Nov 27, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:

> 
> In message <B939184E-AE28-44CE-A6E5-80EDB34E32CD@nominum.com>, Ted Lemon writes
> :
>> On Nov 26, 2013, at 11:52 PM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>> And it has the same problem as do-not-track, there's no way to tell
>>> whether people you don't trust are following it.
>> 
>> I thought the point was for it to advise network geolocation survey bots
>> that the hotspot with this ssid is mobile and can't be used for
>> geolocation.
>> 
> 
> The point was for it to advise network survey bots that the hotspot
> with this ssid can't/shouldn't be recorded in any database.
> 
> There are reasons to set this other than the ap is mobile.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email