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

[Abdullah DevRel of IPinfo via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

Hi John,

Good question. When we identify conflicts between our measurements and a geofeed, we don't automatically assume the 
geofeed is wrong. 

The process is:

When contacted by an ISP about a conflict, we investigate and share our measurement data with them. Often this reveals 
network architecture issues (anycast, aggregation points, CGNAT) that explain the discrepancy. We adjust our scoring 
based on their feedback.

For systematic issues we observe across multiple prefixes from the same ASN, we do reach out proactively - particularly 
if it affects user experience (support tickets, access issues).

For individual prefix mismatches where we haven't received complaints, we don't proactively contact every ASN. At 
global scale (analyzing millions of prefixes), this would be operationally challenging.

The limitation you're identifying is real. We could do more proactive outreach when we detect conflicts. That's 
valuable feedback. Would you recommend a specific approach - perhaps flagging high-confidence conflicts in a report 
ISPs could opt into?

— Abdullah | DevRel, IPinfo
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/U2KEBUKX5ITIDDHGPHPSMDQPFLEW5VSI/