Hi, admin James gives a good explanation. Should I resubmit this proposal?
On Sat, 2006-12-16 at 00:26, James Carlson wrote: > UNIX admin writes: > > > Now solaris just supports ADSL with ethernet > > > interface, and we must > > > extend sppptun to support USB ADSL modem. > > > > This has me confused. I have an ADSL "modem" (those are bridges > > really) at home and I have the thing hooked up directly into my > > Solaris firewall. Except configuring the default route and NAT to be > > the ADSL "modem", I didn't need to fiddle with sppptun. > > There are unforunately several different 'flavors' of ADSL. The > requirements differ based on which country you're in, which provider > you have, and what equipment you're using. Some of the cases I've > seen: > > - Provider runs Ethernet bridged over ATM, with plain old IP on > Ethernet and a DHCP server. You're in luck because you've got a > fairly clueful and friendly provider. You don't need anything but > the existing IP support in Solaris. > > - Provider uses PPP over PPPoE over Ethernet over ATM, and your > local device is just an Ethernet over ATM bridge. You'll need > PPPoE, which is built into Solaris. (We lack the horribly hackish > TCP MSS brutalizing "feature" that some other OSes have, and that > can be a problem if you're using Solaris to NAT or route for other > machines. Also PPPoE itself imposes an MTU of 1492, which often > ends up causing connectivity problems even in the best of cases. > Avoid like a bad head cold.) > > - Provider uses PPP over ATM, and your box attaches by way of USB or > is a plug-in card. This appears to be common in the UK. You'll > likely need what the proposed project will deliver. > > - Provider uses PPP over ATM, and your box is actually a NAT with > Ethernet on the other side. You won't need any special software; > it'll "just work," modulo the usual problems that NAT's lack of > transparency imposes. > > Yes, that's actually ATM on the DSL link. At one point in time, I > think they expected users to want separate VCs for different services > with the magic of ATM's QoS, but like ATM to the desktop, that never > really materialized. In any event, ATM makes for a handy statistical > multiplexing solution that carriers understand how to handle, albeit > with some overhead and cost. (Using actual routers would likely be > better for all concerned, but the management part is the big concern.) > > There are other configurations that are technically possible (such as > running PPP on HDLC over the DSL bit stream -- the lowest possible > overhead), but I haven't seen them in the wild. > > Thus, specifying something like "ADSL modem support" is a bit > ambiguous. It would be nice to call this project "PPPoA" or "USB ADSL > support" instead. > > -- > James Carlson, KISS Network <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 > MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
