Excelent... I have a few customers who use multiple IPs, it would be
fantastic if they could be routed over PPPoE.

Thanks,
Roger
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Hokenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: [smartBridges] sB Network Issue


> You can route subnets over PPPoE if you want.
>
> JH
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Roger Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 10:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [smartBridges] sB Network Issue
>
>
> > This is suddenly looking more attractive. I was going to persue routing
> each
> > customer and providing a subnet of IP addresses to each one. I think
I'll
> > experiment with pppoe and see how it works out.
> >
> > Thanks for the info.
> > Roger
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Colin Watson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 11:59 AM
> > Subject: Re: [smartBridges] sB Network Issue
> >
> >
> > > Because everything is tunneled over the PPP connection. Each client
> > connects
> > > via a dedicated tunnel to the PPP Server, which performs all the
> requests
> > on
> > > teh clients behalf (for instance answering ARP requests - Proxy
ARP's).
> > It's
> > > better to visualise a PPP session as a link between the customer and
the
> > PPP
> > > Server, as opposed to the current way which is the Customer --> Access
> > Point
> > > then ---> NOC/Shaping system. To illustrate:
> > >
> > >
> > > Customer PC<=============================>ROUTER (Logical Layout in
PPP)
> > > Customer PC<----->CPE<---->AP<---->SWITCH<---->ROUTER (Physical
Layout)
> > >
> > > Because *All* client traffic is *forced* down the PPP tunnel (ICMP, et
> > al),
> > > you have full control over what your customers can and cannot do. For
> > > instance, when they reach the PPP Server (Access Concentrator) - All
> > Netbios
> > > (Windows File & Printer Sharing) can be blocked, all ICMP traffic
could
> be
> > > blocked (if you wanted), All packets can be shaped so the customer can
> > only
> > > transmit/receive at the alloted bandwidth, you can also block virus
> > > prolifiration ports. If you are running a pure Layer 2 Network (I.e.
teh
> > > only router is at your NOC), then this would be ideal because each
> client
> > > that connects will go through the PPPoE server at the NOC. Think of it
> as
> > a
> > > transparent proxy server, Basically thats what it is. PPP is NOT IP
> > traffic,
> > > PPP is an encapsulation protocol (like a bucket which you can fill
with
> > many
> > > things).
> > >
> > > Just for your info, 99.9% of routers support PPPoE, - Most DSL ISP's
use
> > > PPPoE or PPPoA for authenticaing and controlling their customers.
> Because
> > > you have a fixed point which concentrates access, you have a high
degree
> > of
> > > control over your network. Also, you can 'share' a PPPoE connection
via
> > > Windows ICS - negating the need for cheapskates who don't want to buy
a
> > > router.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Colin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Roger Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 4:58 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [smartBridges] sB Network Issue
> > >
> > >
> > > > How can PPPoE stop a client from sending out ICMP echo requests? If
> the
> > > > traffic gets dropped at the NOC queue then that customer can still
tie
> > up
> > > > all the air time of the access point and bring the wireless side of
> the
> > > > network to it's knees. It keeps pinging whether it gets a response
or
> > not,
> > > > whether the packets are dropped somewhere or not.
> > > >
> > > > I am looking into using PPPoE, I might set this up yet.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Roger
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Colin Watson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 10:24 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [smartBridges] sB Network Issue
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Or, C) Use PPPoE :)
> > > > >
> > > > > PPPoE overcomes all these problems, it also ensures you remove IP
> > > traffic
> > > > > from your client <-> AP wireless link (You tunnel everything over
> > PPP).
> > > > > Basically, if you use PPP you get to control the entire
connection,
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > > IP leasing (So the user hasn't gotta configure anything, cept
press
> > > > > Next->Next->Next), dns servers, and netmask. In addition you get
all
> > the
> > > > > logging functionality (if you auth to a radius server). The other
> (and
> > > the
> > > > > one I imagine you are most interested) is the ability to traffic
> > limit.
> > > > > Because all traffic *has* to go through the PPP Tunnel, your
client
> > can
> > > > only
> > > > > receive teh bandwidth you have designated him/her. So if one of
the
> > > > buggers
> > > > > contracts a nasty strain of MSBLaST, and are paying for a 128/128
> > > > > connection, then they will only be able to spew traffic out at
> 128K -
> > no
> > > > > more, because the rest will get dropped at the NOC's queue. Also,
it
> > > means
> > > > > clients can communicate with each other, even when Interlcient
> > > > communication
> > > > > is disabled - but only at the bandwidth they are paying for - So
no
> > one
> > > > can
> > > > > hog all the air bandwidth - Really is a fantastic System :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Colin.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Roger Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 5:04 AM
> > > > > Subject: [smartBridges] sB Network Issue
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > One of the problems I seem to be facing frequently these days is
> > that
> > > a
> > > > > > single customer can get a virus and generate tremendous amounts
of
> > > > > traffic,
> > > > > > which brings the whole network to a crawl. Normally bandwidth
> > shaping
> > > at
> > > > > the
> > > > > > NOC will limit the amount the customer can transmit, due to the
> > > > > Transmission
> > > > > > Control Protocol part of TCP/IP. But if it is something like the
> > > > > Nachi.worm
> > > > > > it is ping packets which do not have transmission control and
can
> be
> > > > > spewed
> > > > > > out at tremendous rates that no bandwidth shaper can control. So
> > > what's
> > > > > the
> > > > > > solution to stop these slowdowns and outages caused by these
> > viruses?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A) Reduce the customer's functionality by insisting they use a
> > router
> > > or
> > > > > > firewall.
> > > > > > B) Have bandwidth shaping at the CPE.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personally I prefer B.... but that seems to be expensive,
usually.
> > > > > > Smartbridges, it might be something you can include in your
Nexus
> > > > product?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Roger
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> > > > > smartBridges <yournickname>
> > > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type
> unsubscribe
> > > > > smartBridges)
> > > > > > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> > > > smartBridges <yournickname>
> > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type
unsubscribe
> > > > smartBridges)
> > > > > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
> > > >
> > > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> > > smartBridges <yournickname>
> > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
> > > smartBridges)
> > > > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> > smartBridges <yournickname>
> > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
> > smartBridges)
> > > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
> >
> > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> smartBridges <yournickname>
> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
> smartBridges)
> > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
>
> The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
smartBridges <yournickname>
> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
smartBridges)
> Archives: http://archives.part-15.org

The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges 
<yournickname>
To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges)
Archives: http://archives.part-15.org  

Reply via email to