STARK, BARBARA H <[email protected]> wrote: > Some ISPs provide their customers with an option of receiving a "basic" > (single LAN Ethernet port, no Wi-Fi) CE router that has no > firewall. The expectation is that most users who are asking for these > routers will put their own router behind the CE router, and this > user-supplied interior router (IR) will have whatever firewall the user > wants.
> [Additional info for the curious: The ISP-provided CE router is
> responsible for all interactions with the ISP network (all DHCP,
> PPPoE). For IPv4, the ISP-provided router has an IP passthrough
> function that provides the acquired public IPv4 address to the IR, when
> the IR does a DHCPv4 request to the CE router. For IPv6, the CE router
> sub-delegates (IA_PD) from the prefix it got from the ISP. You may
> wonder why bother with a router; why not just provide a bridged modem?
> By having it as a router, the device is manageable (it can have its
> firmware updated, run diagnostics, manage PPPoE credentials that users
> struggle to remember, etc.), and troubleshooting is simplified because
> most users can directly connect a PC to the ISP-supplied router when on
> a help desk call (which results in shorter help desk calls). In other
> words, the basic CE router has significantly lower operational costs
> than a bridged modem.]
so this a real layer-3 device, and not just a layer-3 device with layer-3
turned off? I've never seen such a thing.
And most of the devices I've seen have all of the management functions
(TR-079, etc.), which runs on a seperate "VLAN" (cable) or ?VC (DSL), and
leave the PPPoE to the "IR"
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
pgpfmqxUMRmW1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
