WHAT??? Is this the extent to which This-List has DEGENERATED???
How dare you make such a horrendous accusation Sir? You may NOT like what OP has proposed. I don't either for more reasons than one! However, YOU are neither qualified NOR authorised to ask such an appallingly INSENSITIVE Question! Your so called "Freedom-of-Speech" DOES NOT translate to Character-Assasination on this or any other forum!! Follow me you ipdog? Find you own bitch to abuse. Don't do it here!! ./Randy --- On Sun, 11/25/12, Network IPdog <network.ip...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Network IPdog <network.ip...@gmail.com> > Subject: RE: Adding GPS location to IPv6 header > To: "'John Adams'" <j...@retina.net>, "'Ammar Salih'" > <ammar.sa...@auis.edu.iq> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Date: Sunday, November 25, 2012, 3:16 PM > Et al, > > There is one simple question that needs to be asked! > > > Ammar Salih @ ammar.sa...@auis.edu.iq > Are you a terrorist? > > > > Ephesians 4:32 & Cheers!!! > > A password is like a... toothbrush ;^) > Choose a good one, change it regularly and don't share it. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Adams [mailto:j...@retina.net] > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2012 2:20 PM > To: Ammar Salih > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > list > Subject: Re: Adding GPS location to IPv6 header > > Your proposal doesn't even give people a way to encrypt > their location data; > By moving geodata to a portion of the protocol which is not > covered by > commonly used encryption methods (i.e. HTTPS, which is up a > few layers in > the stack) people can't be protected should this data be > monitored by a > malicious intermediary. Think: Syria, China, Iran, or any > other government > which will kill you for your words online. > > Application protocols sending GPS data under say, HTTPS > protect the end user > from revealing their location to anyone on their path, > forcing an > intermediary to look up the IP in a common geo database > which will be mostly > inaccurate in pinpointing users, and hopefully will save > lives. > > Companies like Twitter, Facebook, and some parts of google > are going HTTPS > by default for this very reason. > > This proposal is dead, you don't have the sense to lie > down. > > >
