I think that's a little facile.
The evil bit is ridiculous because evil people have no incentive to set it
(thus nobody would ever look for it to be set). With the _nomap suffix,
the people who would need to set it have an incentive to do so, and at
least in certain cases, the entities that might consume it have incentives
to obey it as well.
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Eric Burger
<eburger(_at_)cs(_dot_)georgetown(_dot_)edu>wrote:
Tastes like the ‘evil’ bit, in reverse.
On Nov 25, 2013, at 6:50 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi(_at_)gmx(_dot_)net>
wrote:
Hi,
My smartphone can turn into a Wifi access point so I can easily use
its Internet connection from my netbook. Problem is that nearby devices
I do not control might report my whereabouts to third parties that map
network equipment to geographic locations. A naming convention for net-
works has been proposed to address this, append "_nomap" to the network
name and "good actors" will ignore it. I thought it would be a good idea
to document this convention in a better place than a single vendor's
blog post, so two years ago today I published
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoehrmann-nomap-00
I think this is a "better than nothing" mechanism and I am not the most
qualified person to document it, and there was pretty much no interest
in the document when I announced it. Still, especially considering more
and more organisations are collecting such data, I think this needs good
documentation. I am looking for volunteers, suggestions, whatever helps
getting that done without a lot of effort on my part...
Thanks!
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern(_at_)hoehrmann(_dot_)de ·
http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/