[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a nationwide network
- Subject: wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a nationwide network
- From: frnkblk at iname.com (Frank Bulk)
- Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:41:42 -0500
- In-reply-to: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1109181614070.152@antonio-querubins-imac-g5-9.local>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1109181614070.152@antonio-querubins-imac-g5-9.local>
I should have made myself more clear -- the policy amendment would make
clear that multihoming requires only one facilities-based connection and
that the other connections could be fulfilled via tunnels. This may be
heresy for some.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Antonio Querubin [mailto:tony at lavanauts.org]
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:27 PM
To: Frank Bulk
Cc: 'Leigh Porter'; 'Charles N Wyble'; nanog at nanog.org
Subject: RE: wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a
nationwide network
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Frank Bulk wrote:
> I understand that tunneling meets the letter of the ARIN policy, but
> I'll make the bold assumption that wasn't the spirit of the policy when
> it was written. Maybe the policy needs to be amended to clarify that.
I think this is a bad idea and I suspect would slow IPv6 deployment.
Potential latency issues aside, is there a technical (not political)
reason for doing so?
Antonio Querubin
e-mail: tony at lavanauts.org
xmpp: antonioquerubin at gmail.com