Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:32:49PM -0400, Joel M. Halpern: > (the authors would not have written it if no one wanted it.) eh, that might not be a valid argument :) > Also, one of the arguments for doing this in the router is that you can > get more timely and precise correlation. Except that for geolocation of > address blocks, upstream correlation seems to be quite sufficiently > stable and precise. NLRI may come and go. I fone has geo-information, > it is unlikely to change. This may have been answered, but in case not or un-clear; what I and I believe others refer to here as geo location, is different from what you and randy are talking about in the sense of the IETF's prefixes. I do not always care about that location. I am placing my own marks on routes - where I hear them; region, country, metro, relationship with the neighbor, etc. Though it is not the whole story, this is typically of more interest to me. If a neighbor AS does similarly and sends them to me, I could make use of them. However, as you observed, these are all choices local to the AS - the values, whether to send them, etc. There is definitely a maintenance cost associate with using this data and a question of accuracy. Other's comments about accuracy and burden of external enrichment are valid. Whether this particular additional resolution is much of a burden on routers, I suspect not, but I am not an implementer. Authors: please use a spell checker. Also seems a few of the reference links are broken.
