From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay04.perrit.net (relay04.perrit.net [185.10.156.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFD113B29D for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 12:25:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from relay02.perrit.net (clamav02.perrit.net [172.18.1.48]) by relay02.perrit.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0F08434B8 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 18:25:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from mta2.perrit.net (mta2.perrit.net [185.10.156.170]) by relay02.perrit.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9833E434B5 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 18:25:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from migrate.perrit.net (migrate.perrit.net [172.18.3.45]) by mail.perrit.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 782103498E0 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 18:25:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from [172.20.1.116] (unknown [82.74.152.173]) by migrate.perrit.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 678B0283706 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 18:25:12 +0100 (CET) To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net References: From: Leen Besselink Message-ID: <93030595-f65e-4759-867e-ba6334258964@consolejunkie.net> Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 18:25:12 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Subject: Re: [Bloat] ipv6 with telephone number mapping X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 17:25:14 -0000 Wouldn't that be a huge privacy/security/spam problem ? If you can reach a phone over the Internet just based on knowing a phone-number... probably has more problems than solutions. Definitely would like one of the existing or even a new DNS VoIP standards to be properly adopted so people have more control of their own numbers. On 25-11-2021 18:26, Dave Taht wrote: > What's the real barrier to doing this nowadays? We use signal in this > way, sort of: > > https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1463740452260171776 > > "There should be an automatic mapping from cellular numbers to IPV6 > addresses so you can run a directly accessible server on any cell > phone." > >