This requires pppoeoa support / configuration on BRAS. You can configure pppoeoa on CPE but it will not negotiate as ser ver will be expecting PPPoA encap and you are sending PPPoE.
Regards, Vikas > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:03:23 -0500 > From: "Jason Gurtz" <[email protected]> > To: "Cisco Network Service Providers" <[email protected]> > Subject: [c-nsp] Pointer to PPPoE docs for 887 CPE? > Message-ID: > <a92eaf652ec423438d55c14c60771c8702eb5...@exchgsrv.nputilities.local> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > All the Cisco Documentation seem to assume that the ATM interface will be > used for VDSL or PPPoA. PPPoE is shown running over Eth0 and we'd like to > ditch the ATT provided "modem" device. > > Is there any IOS 15 examples out there for running the PPPoE dialer over > ATM0.1 in on this device? > > ~JasonG > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:38:01 -0600 > From: Rick Martin <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] High Density T1 aggregation device - migrating to > MPLS > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Thanks to all for the replies to this question, we have settled on ASR 1006 > with two 5 port gig SPA's and a couple of 1 port STM-1/OC-3 SPAs for > terminating the T1's. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeremy Bresley > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 3:43 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] High Density T1 aggregation device - migrating to MPLS > > On 12/3/2010 12:16 PM, Rick Martin wrote: >> >> We are in the planning stages for a conversion to an MPLS infrastructure, >> we have about 3,000 connections on this statewide network which spans 3 >> major carriers territory. We expect we will wind up with one vendor at the >> core. Assuming vendor A wins the core we expect we will have to provide >> hardware to aggregate connections from vendor B and C's territory and pass >> those connections on to the core via Ethernet. >> >> Our expectation is that we will have 2 types of last mile connections to >> our customers - Ethernet and MPPP via T1's. Of course our preference would >> be Ethernet for all of the WAN links but at this time that is not possible >> due to the rural nature of portions of our state. We expect perhaps 50 - 100 >> T1's at a given aggregation point. >> >> I am in need of advice on what products are available for high density >> aggregation of the T1's. I am currently researching Cisco products but do >> not want to limit my scope to Cisco only. I would welcome any suggestions or >> advice on this. >> >> Thanks in advance for your suggestions >> rick >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > Biggest question with aggregating T1s would be whether to get an > external MUX to aggregate T1s into DS3/OC3s, or whether your carrier(s) > can do this and hand off DS3/OC3s to you. > > If you can get DS3s or OC3s handed to you, a channelized DS3 or > channelized OC3 card in a 7200 or ASR should be able to handle this > easily. If you have discrete T1s coming in, you're probably looking at > several routers to handle 100 T1s. Most of the T1 cards only scale to 8 > ports. 100 T1s would be able to be handled by 4 channelized DS3 cards. > > If your carriers can't hand you off DS3/OC3, one option would be to feed > the T1s into one or more M13 MUXes (Adtran MX2800 series is one example > of these.) > > One thing to double check on the channelized cards is that there are no > known issues with running MLPPP across them, and verify if all the T1s > would be on the same DS3, and running MLPPP across multiple cards was > problematic with the 7200 cards. > > Jeremy > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:06:51 -0500 > From: Brian Christopher Raaen <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Pointer to PPPoE docs for 887 CPE? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Friday, December 17, 2010 12:03:23 pm Jason Gurtz wrote: >> All the Cisco Documentation seem to assume that the ATM interface will be >> used for VDSL or PPPoA. PPPoE is shown running over Eth0 and we'd like to >> ditch the ATT provided "modem" device. >> >> Is there any IOS 15 examples out there for running the PPPoE dialer over >> ATM0.1 in on this device? >> >> ~JasonG >> > Here is a config from my 3725 router at home on Belsouth (AT&T). > > interface ATM0/0 > no ip address > no atm ilmi-keepalive > dsl operating-mode auto > dsl enable-training-log > dsl lom 7 > ! > interface ATM0/0.1 point-to-point > no ip redirects > pvc 8/35 > encapsulation aal5snap > protocol ppp dialer > dialer pool-member 1 > ! > ! > interface Dialer0 > ip address negotiated > ip mtu 1470 > ip nat outside > ip virtual-reassembly > encapsulation ppp > dialer pool 1 > dialer-group 1 > no cdp enable > ppp authentication chap callin > ppp chap hostname LOGIN > ppp chap password 0 PASSWORD > ! > ip nat inside source list 1 interface Dialer0 overload > ! > logging history debugging > access-list 1 permit network block > > > --- > Brian Raaen > Network Architech > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:33:25 -0200 > From: "Leonardo Gama Souza" <[email protected]> > To: "Phil Mayers" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [c-nsp] RES: RES: Multicast on L3 switch > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >> Hmm. Have you checked the TTL of the multicast traffic isn't ==1? > > Elementary... > > Thanks much Phil! > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 12:30:53 +0100 > From: Peter Rathlev <[email protected]> > To: cisco-nsp <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] XMODEM transfer over telnet/ssh, any chance? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 00:18 +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote: >> It still doesn't work on a Sup720, so that sounds plausible. >> >> It does work just as it should when I put a C2800 there instead >> though. Will try upgrading the ROMMON on the Sup720 to see if that >> helps. > > As a small follow-up: I upgraded the ROMMON til 8.5(4) and now XMODEM > works on the Sup720. > > -- > Peter > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list > [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > > End of cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 97, Issue 58 > ***************************************** > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
