On 21 March 2013 05:23, Graham Beneke <gra...@apolix.co.za> wrote: > On 21/03/2013 09:23, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: >> On 20 March 2013 21:29, Masataka Ohta <mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> >> wrote: >>> Constantine A. Murenin wrote: >>> >>>> Why even stop there: all modern browsers usually know the exact >>>> location of the user, often with street-level accuracy. >>> >>> If you think mobile, they don't, especially because "often" is >>> not at all "enough times". >> >> Are you suggesting that geolocation is inaccurate enough to misplace >> Europe with Asia? > > I don't think that it is even a suggestion. It is trivially achievable: > > I have a transit provider which is a US based company. They route a > small slice of their IP space to us over the transit link... > at their PoP in London... > where I pick it up and route it to Johannesburg. > > All the while - geolocation is convinced those IPs reside in the > hometown of my transit provider. > > I also know of many people who use VPNs to intentionally goelocate > themselves somewhere other than their real location in order to get > around certain content filtering.
Your two examples are quite the opposite of each other, I don't know if this was your intention. In the first case, when a US-based (and/or ARIN issued) address space is moved to Europe or Africa, a server-based geoloc would result in suboptimal results, but a client-based geoloc would very likely provide sought-after results. In the second, VPN case -- exactly the opposite -- server-based would work great, client based would be suboptimal. Does it show that geoloc is hard to get right? Yes. But what I don't understand is why everyone implies that the status quo with round-robin DNS is any better. C.