[reaperducer]

>Your anger is equivalent to being mad that someone looked at the from: address on an envelope when you told them not to.

No, it's the equivalent of asking a woman in a bar if you can call her and when she says "no," you look up her number in the phone book and call her anyway.

[oarsinsync]

Except she’s not forced to wear her full name on display at the bar (unlike IP addressing) and is able to opt out of being in the phone book (unlike GeoIP . DBs).

I get what you’re saying and I see where you’re coming from, but to try and use this phone number analogy, it’s like telling someone what city/state they’re in based on their area code when they’ve opted to provide you no location information beyond their phone number.

The phone number itself contains location information. It’s not necessary accurate information as I could easily (and do) use a 212 number wherever I am I the USA, not just in New York.

Finally, we’ve had rulings about phone numbers and IP addresses. Phone numbers “belong” to the end user, not the operator, and move with the user if they want to. IP addresses “belong” to the carrier, and are non portable. In a number of cases, carriers actively provide city-level accuracy for where they’re using their IP space as it actively improves performance for end users.