[ncc-services-wg] IP geolocation services

Daniel Karrenberg wrote:

> On 28.10 09:29, Marco Hogewoning wrote:
> 
> ... 
> 
> 
>>I can think of option 1 happening, in fact that mechanism is there,  
> 
> 
> Vergard (and others) found out this is not happening.
> 
> 
>>option 2 (push) is almost impossible to achieve 
> 
> 
> agree
> 
> 
>>and I don't like option 3 at all.
> 
> 
> The RIRs are currently discussing an extended 'stats' file format
> that will include the "unallocated" address space. This waay
> ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/delegated-ripencc-latest
> and similar files from other RIRs would include the unallocated address
> space as well.  This way we aim to publish once a day a onsistent view
> about *all* address space.  Once implemented this couldbe used as option
> 3. If it was useful we could add a "quarantined" flag to help. 
> 
> What do people think?

I think that is a very laudable goal to achieve - in itself!

It would conribute to the vision of having a unique or coordinated
source for information about the status of resources on a global level;
by just consulting one source/file/feed/list/you name it at an arbitrary
point in time.

One of the problems that I perceive as fundamental in the curent way
that the set of Registries manages the global resource pool is the
"regional concept". This starts at whois and maybe ends at geolocation.

Btw, I am not saying that this should be changed, quite to the contrary.
But it adds complexity to the system and makes it difficult to understand
for the uninitiated ;-)

That said, this list would offer just another means for the GL service
providers to try and provide a better (more accurate, more up-to-date)
service. At the same time it would not help in getting around the facts
(of differnet kinds) that the management, the operations and logistics
of the Internet are agnostic - by design - of national or regional
geographic boundaries or numbering trees.

> Daniel

Wilfried