From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org  Fri Aug  5 05:33:32 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F336FBAD57A
 for <freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri,  5 Aug 2016 05:33:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au)
Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [115.70.110.159])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D01B1336;
 Fri,  5 Aug 2016 05:33:31 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id u755XQZ0030960;
 Fri, 5 Aug 2016 15:33:27 +1000 (EST)
 (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au)
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 15:33:26 +1000 (EST)
From: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: your thoughts on a particualar ipfw action.
In-Reply-To: <5ca6bec5-0cff-b9f0-8d1e-abc858e32703@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20160805152657.O56585@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
References: <20160805024301.H56585@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
 <b4eb71be-9490-5c22-d22b-f6a1612e38d3@freebsd.org>
 <CAHu1Y72jggDjv1uCdS6SMez9nUEPVHvLZHkZP9vFu-VqA5SuGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5ca6bec5-0cff-b9f0-8d1e-abc858e32703@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions <freebsd-ipfw.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ipfw>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2016 05:33:33 -0000

On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 13:22:50 +0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
 > On 5/08/2016 12:15 PM, Michael Sierchio wrote:
 > > Wouldn't it make sense to use the ISO Numeric Code / UN M49 Numerical Code?

 > actually it doesn't make sense. the source of data doesn't have that 
 > information in it so it would require a whole layer of mapping, 
 > including downloads. and it would have to cope with unexpected 
 > ambiguities and mismatches.

Yeah, no .. to address this point first, I misunderstood mention of it 
to indicate that data was also available in what geoip is using.  Given 
that it's not, agreed it'd be way too much hassle to synchronise ..

cheers, Ian