I have no problem with IPIP tunnels. I just don't think it is the best architecture to have every node maintaining IPIP routes to every other node, a tiered network and one or two neighbors for each node is easier to setup and maintain. My goal is to get more people using 44net.
BTW, if anyone has in their EMComm plan that 44net will give them connectivity, "When all else fails..." it is a delusion. Even if you have IPIP tunnels, you have to have Internet connectivity to get to the other end of the tunnel. If you have IPIP connectivity, you have Internet connectivity and can pass the traffic over standard channels.
In a real Emcomm (less than 1% of network utilization), you just have to get traffic to a relay point. Your RF network may or may not get you there, but your IPIP tunnel doesn't give you any advantage over the ISP you are connected to.
------------------------------ John D. Hays K7VE PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 http://k7ve.org/blog http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays http://www.facebook.com/john.d.hays
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Ryan Elliott Turner ryan.e.t@gmail.comwrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ In the IPIP tunnels, on both ends, you have a single point of failure since you cannot multihome (as discussed 25 MAR "Can't add redundant AMPR gateway to portal").
I know that the network I'm building as well as a few other BGP announced networks are multihomed -- no single point of failure to the internet. In fact, we have planned for one of the BGP announcements and peering to take place at one of our RF point of presences.
Another advantage is latency... having traffic travel from Memphis to San Diego and back just to get from my cellphone to a 44net-connected server in the same room is disappointing.