RE: Geofeeds are adversarial — was Re: Geofeeds are good

[Mu via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

On Tuesday, February 17th, 2026 at 1:02 AM, Abdullah DevRel of IPinfo via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:

> Hi Serhii,
>
> [...] snip [...]
>
> When an ISP contacts us saying "your data conflicts with our geofeed and here's why we're correct," we investigate 
> and adjust the scoring for that prefix. I've done this several times during this thread - reviewing evidence with 
> ISPs, presenting it to our data team, and updating the geofeed priority scoring.
>
> [...] snip [...]
> — Abdullah | DevRel, IPinfo

Funny, in this single email thread with only a handful of people you've had to make corrections "several times".
I thought your data was super accurate?

It's crazy that there's apparently a viable business model in creating bad data and selling it.
And when that bad data inevitably causes issues... you force others to correct it!
All while ignoring the correct data operators are _already providing_.
Best of all, you somehow manage to pat yourself on the back afterwards?

The whole geoip business model is pure slime.

-mu
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/WDLRYK44KBDASVUQINKDDWFKCTLZHV5S/