I disagree. I think that the underlying physical topology of your network is 
something
ARIN is quite intentionally agnostic about.

Owen

On Sep 18, 2011, at 6:25 PM, 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.
> 
> Frank
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leigh Porter [mailto:leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 6:37 PM
> To: frnk...@iname.com; 'Charles N Wyble'; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a 
> nationwide network
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
>> Sent: 18 September 2011 23:14
>> To: 'Charles N Wyble'; nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: RE: wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on
>> building a nationwide network
>> 
>> Where I live in rural America, I would not be surprised that someone
>> who wanted to start an ISP might only be able to cost-justify one
>> upstream.  When one Internet T-1 is $1,200/month, getting a second T-1
>> for that price from another provider just to get an AS or PI is
>> definitely cost-prohibitive and may go against their business plan.
>> 
>> Our own company has just one upstream provider (from geographically
>> diverse POPs), our state's telecom coop, and to multi-home solely to
>> meet ARIN's policy doesn't make sense.  Fortunately we were using
>> enough address space to meet the /20 requirement.
>> 
>> Charles, if you wrote a policy that allowed smaller ISPs to obtain a PI
>> without the multihoming requirement if they demonstrated that
>> multihoming was burdensome, I would support it at arin-ppml.
>> 
>> Frank
> 
> I'll happily 'multihome' anybody over a GRE tunnel if it helps ;-)
> 
> --
> Leigh
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 


Reply via email to