Hello IETF, based on my discussions with both ipv6 and geopriv teams, I've
written the below document to summarize few ideas.
Is it possible to publish this on IETF website? even if it will not be
implemented now, at least for documentation and requesting feedback from the
community.
Many thanks.
Ammar
Ammar J. Salih
Baghdad, Iraq
October 30, 2012
Title: IP-LOC
Adding GPS location to IPv6 header
Abstract:
=========
This document describes IP-LOC, an extension to IPv6 header which
suggests adding GPS coordinates, as the current method of determining the
location of IP traffic is through IP address registration database, which is
not very accurate as it depends on how the ISP registers its IP subnets,
that is normally done in a country/city format.
It also assumes that in the future, GPS capability will be added to the
router itself (just like smart phones) and packet marking and classification
based on geo-location will be required.
QoS, firewall and routing based on geo-location will be highly required when
mobile routers move from one geo-location to another which has different
policy.
Benefits of adding GPS location to IPv6 header (IP-LOC)
=======================================================
Web Services: getting more accurate locations will enhance many services
provided by the web, like targeted commercials (for example, I can get Ads
regarding restaurants available in my neighborhoods instead of all
restaurants in the city), another good example would be webpage's language,
my language will be detected more accurately based on my area rather than my
country, as there are many countries with more than one popular language,
not mentioning that many ip registrations does not even reflect the traffic
originating country.
-------------------------------
Information accuracy and control: Nowadays, locations are assigned to IP
addresses without user awareness or control, every time a user performs
ip-lookup query the response would be different based on how the ISP has
registered this IP subnet, IP-LOC suggests making locations more accurate
and controllable through OS and network devices, exactly like IP addresses
(user can change his/her IP address, but router can also modify the header
information - in case it's required).
-------------------------------
Routing: Policy based routing, based on geo-location, like routing
predefined traffic through certain server or path, for different purposes
(security, manageability, serviceability like choosing language, or routing
traffic to specific cashing or proxy server based on country .. etc)
-------------------------------
Copyright law: It happens when certain media/web content is not allowed in
certain countries due to copyright law, the current method of determining
locations is not accurate at all, on other hand, If layer-7 application to
be used then the user might be able to manipulate the location field, in
this case (if it's required in future) the ISP can tag traffic with
country/city more accurately as traffic passes through ISP's boarder
routers.
-------------------------------
Maps, navigation, emergency calls and many other services will be also
enhanced with accurate locations.
CURRENT ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS IDEA:
========================================
"Adding GPS position to every IPv6 header would add a lot of overhead"
Response: It does not have to be in every IPv6 header, only when there is
location update, also the host should have the option of not to send
location updates.
-------------------------------
"What about privacy?"
Response: User should have the option of not sending location updates. User
should also have the ability to set location to all zeros, in this case no
router will modify the location field and user loses the location-based
services.
If it's router-to-router link, then no need to be worried about privacy as
such information usually configured on a separate network.
--------------------------------
"a good alternative would be to create application layer protocols that
could request and send GPS positions"
Response: the layer-7 location request will not be detected by layer-3
devices (Routers), I am assuming that in the future, GPS capability will be
added to the router itself (just like smart phones), features like packet
marking and classification based on geo-location will be required to enforce
the new geo-location policies.
--------------------------------
"For location-based routing protocols: Why would you want this?
Geographical location isn't actually that important a metric for routing;
what you care about there is *topological* location, how far I am away from
you in terms of hops or latency"
Response: For shortest path maybe yes, hops or latency is important, not for
policy-based routing, in our case you might want to do location-based
routing, like, routing traffic coming from French speaking users (in
multi-language country like Canada) to google.fr
---------------------------------
"For geolocation-based ACLs: you have the problem that if the geolocation is
attached by the endpoint, then it can't be trusted, since the endpoint would
lie to get past the ACL. If it's attached by a router, the ACL needs to
have proof that the router attached it (and not the endpoint), which means
that you would need a signed geolocation header"
Response: You could have the router modify the location field anyways, just
like L3 QoS fields, if you don't trust the host, so no need for encryption
or security, additionally, ACL is not only for security, it could be used
for routing, QoS ..etc, so the host will not always has the motivation to
manipulate the location field.
---------------------------------
"Why can't you simply implement rules related to geo-locations statically on
the network device (router, firewall .. etc)?"
Response: To enforce new geo-location policies automatically, let's assume
that a mobile router (like a mobile BTS in a GSM network) moved from city-x
to city-y, and according to city-x regulations VoIP calls over GSM network
is allowed, but city-y regulations do not allow that. Now the topology may
reflect same network metrics in both cities but there is no rule that
triggers configuration change based on geo-location.
---------------------------------
What do you think?
Author/Contact Information:
Ammar J. Salih
Baghdad, Iraq
Phone: +964 770 533 0306
Email: [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
