Regional assignments are generally for where the end-user hosts will be. You specified tunnel routing for your subnet, so your route goes through the UCSD tunnel IPIP router, but because you're located in Denver and that's where your end-users will be, Denver is the proper subnet and not the subnet for La Jolla. If you're planning to route your subnet directly to the Internet backbone by advertising a route with BGP from a data center, that's an entirely different matter and you need specific permission from the network owner to do so, which according to the portal database, you do not currently have. - Brian On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 03:45:46PM -0600, Mike Vespoli wrote: > I am in need some guidance. I have a number of ways I can use this and I > dont want to set it up wrong from the beginning. > > I was assigned a subnet in Denver, Colorado where I am working with local > groups to get on some tower sites, but I have a Data Center in New Jersey > that has a large VM infrastructure. I live in Colorado but since the data > center is in New Jersey should I get another allocation? I still plan to > use the Denver/Colorado Springs subnet, but that upstream ISP is being > difficult at the moment since I am a subtenant, and my MOU is only for > tower space and a two routers in the cabinet there. > > I was going to just route the Colorado IPs to my New Jersey Data Center > then tunnel back to the Colorado Gateway, but am not sure what the policies > on that are. > > My plans are to offer some free VMs and VPN tunnels to HAMS on my back end > systems as well as VPN gateway points, etc. Those would be in NJ, but once > I finish my migration into a dedicated cabinet here in Denver I would offer > additional VMs / Gateways here as well. Future plans include California and > Croatia. > > Please let me know if anyone has any ideas about what direction I should > go. My provider in NJ is ready to add the routes next week (as soon as the > go ahead authorization from AMPR). > > Thanks, > > Mike Vespoli > Denver Colorado > KE0HFH >

/Were the users region/area are is the subnet. Hopefully the ham at the other side //of your VPN wants to route to the end users of his (coverage) area so he needs //a local subnet if there is none. I routed the subnet for Thailand in the past for example to a couple of  local gateways there. It is obvious that the local gateway in the Bangkok area needs a local subnet for his ham users there so that he can route over the radio to them and not a subnet from here or ip numbers from this area. I only provided Internet ipip routing for them as a service as my commercial ip was fixed. Bob VE3TOK / On 2017-09-29 07:02 PM, Mike Vespoli wrote: > Thanks for your reply. I haven't applied for route permissions yet. I > wanted to know what subnet to advertise. I have a Denver subnet that I > will start to deploy here in Denver Metro at some point in the near future. > I plan on doing VPN gateways, servers and RF access points. That is > waiting on some other tasks I need to finish here, although I should have > full BGP routes up by the end of the year. > > My NJ facility is ready to go live on VPN Gateways and Server, the upstream > IP provider has a work order ready to add the Full BGP route to theirs and > my route table once the permission is granted. At that point I can spin up > a bunch of VMs and VPN gateways. > > > My main question is: Should I apply for a new subnet in the NJ /16 or does > it really matter since that NJ facility will be basically serving the > entire world? NJ will not be serving any RF connections, although it may > do VPN tunnels... > > The other side of that is that can I temporarily route my denver /24 to my > NJ DataCenter so I can start getting things built and tested? when Denver > DC comes online it will be a part of my full routes. > > I am just trying to set this up correctly from the beginning. the geography > of this in my situation makes things more difficult. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Brian Kantor <Brian(a)ucsd.edu> wrote: > >> Regional assignments are generally for where the end-user hosts will be. >> >> You specified tunnel routing for your subnet, so your route goes through >> the UCSD tunnel IPIP router, but because you're located in Denver and >> that's >> where your end-users will be, Denver is the proper subnet and not the >> subnet >> for La Jolla. >> >> If you're planning to route your subnet directly to the Internet backbone >> by advertising a route with BGP from a data center, that's an entirely >> different matter and you need specific permission from the network owner >> to do so, which according to the portal database, you do not currently >> have. >> - Brian >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 03:45:46PM -0600, Mike Vespoli wrote: >>> I am in need some guidance. I have a number of ways I can use this and I >>> dont want to set it up wrong from the beginning. >>> >>> I was assigned a subnet in Denver, Colorado where I am working with local >>> groups to get on some tower sites, but I have a Data Center in New Jersey >>> that has a large VM infrastructure. I live in Colorado but since the >> data >>> center is in New Jersey should I get another allocation? I still plan >> to >>> use the Denver/Colorado Springs subnet, but that upstream ISP is being >>> difficult at the moment since I am a subtenant, and my MOU is only for >>> tower space and a two routers in the cabinet there. >>> >>> I was going to just route the Colorado IPs to my New Jersey Data Center >>> then tunnel back to the Colorado Gateway, but am not sure what the >> policies >>> on that are. >>> >>> My plans are to offer some free VMs and VPN tunnels to HAMS on my back >> end >>> systems as well as VPN gateway points, etc. Those would be in NJ, but >> once >>> I finish my migration into a dedicated cabinet here in Denver I would >> offer >>> additional VMs / Gateways here as well. Future plans include California >> and >>> Croatia. >>> >>> Please let me know if anyone has any ideas about what direction I should >>> go. My provider in NJ is ready to add the routes next week (as soon as >> the >>> go ahead authorization from AMPR). >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Mike Vespoli >>> Denver Colorado >>> KE0HFH >>>