[118773] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Wed Oct 28 17:35:25 2009
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:32:52 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: JD <jdupuy-list@socket.net>
In-Reply-To: <4AE8B5A4.4040404@socket.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
JD wrote:
> There seem to be pros and cons to both directions. Certainly true
> bridging has less overhead. But modern CPEs can minimize the impact of
> PPPoE. PPPoE allows for more flexible provisioning; including via
> RADIUS. Useful for the call center turning customers on/off without NOC
> help. But VLAN tricks can sometimes do many of the same things.
Call your vendor and demand better radius backend support for dhcp. :)
The largest fallback to PPPoE is the CPE needing to terminate the PPPoE
or the customer's router/computer/etc needing to do so. This can be a
pain especially in business environments. I have one section of my
network (maintained by counterpart, not me) that is 90% PPPoE/A. The
other 10% is bridge due to customer needs and CPE limitations.
I personally run all my stuff as bridge, including all the CPEs.
> BTW, I doubt it is relevant to the discussion, but most of our DSLAMS
> are Adtran TA5000s (or are being migrated to that platform.) We are
> mostly a cisco shop for the upstream routers.
I have been extremely happy with unnumbered vlans in the cisco work for
terminating mass vlans from dslams that support 802.1ad. The fact that
it works right next to RBE works great for me. The current IPv6 layouts
aren't as pretty for this setup, though.
Jack
