John,
What are you doing to router subnets over PPPoE?
Are you assigning a RFC 1918 address with PPPoE, then routing the public subnet to the CPE or something similar? Or are you doing something entirely different?


-Eric

John Hokenson wrote:

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