[144769] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Frank Bulk)
Sun Sep 18 22:42:40 2011
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com>
To: "'Antonio Querubin'" <tony@lavanauts.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1109181614070.152@antonio-querubins-imac-g5-9.local>
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:41:42 -0500
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Reply-To: frnkblk@iname.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
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@lavanauts.org]
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:27 PM
To: Frank Bulk
Cc: 'Leigh Porter'; 'Charles N Wyble'; nanog@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@lavanauts.org
xmpp: antonioquerubin@gmail.com
