Marco Hogewoning wrote on 12/11/2019 11:27:
Did somebody take the time and look at the criteria in the draft, do
they make sense from an operational perspective? Of course, we can also
submit something along the lines of “RIPE community has a strong
preference for XYZ”, but to make such a statement on behalf of the
community, we probably need a bit more than the few voices we have heard
so far.
Marco,
often there isn't a clear divide between who controls or who needs to
control the CPE. For example on DSL networks, it's fine for the
customer to own and have full control of the CPE, but on a DOCSIS
network it doesn't work like this. The DOCSIS protocol requires that
the provider maintains substantial control over the CPE both in order to
properly manage spectrum utilisation on the cable segment, but also to
do things like QOS. I.e. if you buy a 100M downstream/10M upstream
package, the DS rate limiting is performed by the CMTS, but the 10M
upstream rate limiting is done by the CPE. So if the end user were to
get full control of the CPE in this situation, then they would be able
to give themselves as much bandwidth as was available, or they could
sniff the cable segment, or inject malicious frames there, or whatever.
Of course it would be possible to use CPE-owned devices, but the
provider will still have substantial control. Also, the provider
wouldn't necessarily be able to offer the same level of service or
support, e.g. the ability to log into the modem and start diagnosing
cable signal problems.
This distinction is not really clear in the BEREC document, and the
DOCSIS situation indicates that this is a subtle and important issue.
Nick
_______________________________________________
connect-wg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/connect-wg
