[168883] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SIP on FTTH systems
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Thu Feb 6 07:29:55 2014
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 13:29:40 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
In-Reply-To: <201402061421.49565.mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Mark Tinka wrote:
> The models I listed are typical to an operator that runs its own
> infrastructure (including the FTTH last mile), and does not necessarily
> wholesale out to other operators.
I disagree on that one as well. It might be in some markets, but it's not
in all.
> I've seen certain countries that have given the incumbents leeway to
> wholesale at the IP level, which the incumbent likes because they
> "perceive" more control than if they had to hand-off Layer 2 wholesale.
> In such cases, VRF's and/or logical routers have been deployed.
This wasn't incumbents specifically, but just a different model to achieve
the same thing, give end users access to multiple ISPs, multiple "cable
TV" vendors, and multiple VOIP providers through a neutral network.
> Agree. DHCP really is the way to go, now. Plus, there is good support
> for IPv6 with vendors today re: DHCP-based subscriber management.
What do you mean by subscriber management? This worked 10 years ago, what
problem are you saying has been solved recently?
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
