I was stunned when I've figured out my ISP uses PPP-over-Ethernet in FTTH environment. After the initial shock, the solution started to look more promising.
Read the whole article in Fragments, the official NIL blog
Ivan Pepelnjak, CCIE#1354, is the chief technology advisor for NIL Data Communications. He has been designing and implementing large-scale data communications networks as well as teaching and writing books about advanced technologies since 1990. See his full profile, contact him or follow @ioshints on Twitter.
Posts
Modern switches can use "option 82" to pass customer port number and "switch id" to DHCP-server. Dynamic ARP inspection and IP source guard can prevent "packet injection".
ReplyDeleteIP over Avian Carriers is classical "long-haul" technology. For shorter distance RFC 1926 is better choice.
ReplyDeleteWell, I'm a bit surprised that you are surprised about this... ;-)
ReplyDeleteHere in Germany, Deutsche Telekom provides its customers FTTC-based VDSL-lines with IP-DSLAM's, so this is quite compareable, and they use PPPoE too.
Honestly, I don't even know if any ISP uses DHCP for access lines here in Germany... (nearly 99,99% use PPP, PPPoE and / or PPPoA I guess)
Another argument for this solution is that you can easily deploy MPLS-VPN's using the same concept. You just have to add a RADIUS-Attribute...
like you say in fragments, much better for security
ReplyDeletethe sad thing is, how many people are going to be running these connections on little crappy home-use routers whose cpu maxes out at 8-10mbps?
This opens the market for dedicated high performance PPPoE optimized network adapters. :)
ReplyDelete@visir: Thanks. I learn something new every day :)
ReplyDelete@A#1: Definitely a better choice for Metro service. But I guess we need a newer version of the standard. If we'd switch to ultrasound (avoiding the range used by bats to decrease background noise), we could drastically increase the transmission speed.
@A#2: I'm not surprised. Now I also know where my SP got this bright idea.
@A#3: You're right ... but in the end, the SP always wins. They give you low-cost crappy router that cannot saturate the link you're paying for, so they lower the overall utilization.
@A#4: I don't think this is an issue on any decent PC/workstation.
And, please, would you finally start using nicknames. Trying to sort out replies to four anonymous commenters is not fun :D
By "dedicated high performance PPPoE optimized network adapter" I mean PCI Express ten gigabit ethernet card with hardware acceleration for PPPoE able to transmit/receive and processing PPPoE frames at the full wirespeed. :)
ReplyDelete