RE: wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a nationwide network

["Frank Bulk" <frnkblk () iname com>]

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