[160257] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Jackson)
Sat Feb 2 22:28:18 2013
In-Reply-To: <CAMrdfRyhoRcCqP10QCDZFPESv42TWF2aRTXrDLjMo=xGfyNRKg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 21:26:31 -0600
From: Tim Jackson <jackson.tim@gmail.com>
To: Scott Helms <khelms@zcorum.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>, Brandon Ross <bross@pobox.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
What does Cisco shitty metro switches have to do with anything?
Haaaaaay we have the best shitty metro-e boxes around. We're awesome.
On Feb 2, 2013 4:49 PM, "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> wrote:
> That's one of the reasons to look at active ethernet over gpon. There is
> much more of a chance to do v6 on that gear, especially cisco's Metro
> ethernet switches.
> On Feb 2, 2013 5:27 PM, "Brandon Ross" <bross@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2 Feb 2013, Scott Helms wrote:
> >
> > I'd also talk with Zhone, Allied Telesys, Adtran, and Cisco if for no
> >> other reason but get the best pricing you can.
> >>
> >
> > I can't believe I'm going to beat Owen to this point, but considering you
> > a building a brand new infrastructure, I'd hope you'd support your
> service
> > provider's stakeholders if they want to do IPv6. To do so securely,
> you'll
> > want your neutral layer 2 infrastrcuture to at least support RA-guard and
> > DHCPv6 shield. You might also want/need DHCPv6 PD snooping, MLD
> snooping.
> > We have found VERY disappointing support for these features in this type
> > of gear.
> >
> > --
> > Brandon Ross Yahoo & AIM:
> > BrandonNRoss
> > +1-404-635-6667 ICQ:
> > 2269442
> > Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/bross Skype:
> > brandonross
> >
>
