[39076] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cable Modem [really more about PPPoE]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris White)
Tue Jun 26 12:37:56 2001
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 12:34:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Chris White <cwhite@happyhappy.net>
To: Steve Schaefer <schaefer@simone.dashbit.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0106260915540.28729-100000@simone.dashbit.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106261231060.2439-100000@cranky.happyhappy.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Steve Schaefer wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Fletcher E Kittredge wrote:
> >
> > You provide frustrating few details and a statement "DHCP alone is not
> > a viable option in this model." Could you restate more concretely
> > what is your design problem which can only be solved by
> > ATM/MPLS/PPPoE? I hesitate to answer for fear that there is some
> > constraint I don't know about.
>
> The constraint is that outbound packets need to go to the right ISP. That
> is, the packets need to go through the carrier network according to the
> business relationship, not according to the destination IP address.
>
> Some method of identifying the ISP associated with each outbound packet is
> necessary. Policy routing, tunnels and PVC's are a few methods.
Ditto
> VLAN tagging works, too.
Ouch:)
>
>
> -Steve
>
>
