On 11/8/21 10:42 pm, pete M via 44Net wrote:
<If the TAC proposal goes ahead, I would keep this structure, though the <BGP routed subnet would be moved to 44.0/10, to comply with the new <structure. The tunneled subnet would likely remain where it is, as it's <already in 44.128/10.
exactly but you would have a easier path to than the IPIP tunel for the 44.128/10 part of the network as it will be available on a POP closer to your location lowering the traveling time of the packets to a few ms rather than the roung trip to VK land to UCSD back to the other IPIP subnet and so on for the answer. back.
My understanding is that the IPIP mesh is peer-peer for traffic carried over the mesh, which means the POP/backbone has to be well designed to maintain latency, since by definition, it will be slightly non optimal for routing (the leg from the end user to the POP is an extra detour).