Alper, It's just a matter of resource management and managing state on the BRAS/BNG.
With PPPoE you have the following steps: Authentication Resource assignment (Address, QoS, filters) With PANA you have the following: Temp resource assignment (Address, QoS, filters) Authentication Removal of temp resources (Address, QoS, filters) Service resource assignment (Address, QoS, filters) The Addresses, Qos and filters will not be the same for temp resource assignment and Service resource assignment. Every login is four step process vs. a two step process and you have to manage some type of token or identifier between the authentication and service resource assignment. Best regards, Bill Welch -----Original Message----- From: Alper Yegin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 9:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bill Welch Cc: 'Internet Area' Subject: RE: [Int-area] DCHP-based authentication for DSL? I think we need to understand this a bit better, as now we are talking about implementation optimizations. > The fact that the BRAS/IP Edge equipment in this case do not have > to "distribute" a full subscriber IP state in the BRAS until the > subscriber is okay, is a big advantage to the subscriber bring up rate. How is the situation different if you were using PANA? > Having a solution that assigns a temporary address or uses a link local > address complicates the implementation and does not mirror the existing > PPPoE solution. Can you please expand on the complication part? Please note that the IP address configured prior to subscriber authentication is not the "service IP address". Also, even with DHCPv6, the client is already configured with a link-local IPv6 address prior to sending the very first DHCPv6 message. Alper _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
