Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com *To: *af af@afmug.com *Sent: *Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian http://facebook.com/packetflux http://twitter.com/@packetflux -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.commailto:ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.commailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
I use OSPF on my network. I send a /25 to each tower which I then break up into /27 per AP. I then give static IPs to each customer and only run DHCP for management networks. I used use a /24 that was open to each tower, but the bridge table almost completely consumed the RAM in the CPEs causing very slow speed issues. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Apr 16, 2015, at 4:38 PM, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net wrote: OSPF works if you have a truly geographically diverse ring redundancy path. Barring that it does little for the situation. I prefer nearness in redundancy which multiple providers, which lends itself to /24 or larger public IP space and BGP type protocol. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:31 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers OSPF On April 16, 2015 1:46:50 PM AKDT, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net wrote: Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Ever thought of enabling port isolation per AP switch port to prevent bridge table excess sizes? I can see it growing crazy with sites with many APs and wondering if that’s some of our CPU/memory issues on older Rocket M5s. On Apr 16, 2015, at 4:54 PM, Brett A Mansfield li...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: I use OSPF on my network. I send a /25 to each tower which I then break up into /27 per AP. I then give static IPs to each customer and only run DHCP for management networks. I used use a /24 that was open to each tower, but the bridge table almost completely consumed the RAM in the CPEs causing very slow speed issues. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Apr 16, 2015, at 4:38 PM, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net mailto:sterl...@avative.net wrote: OSPF works if you have a truly geographically diverse ring redundancy path. Barring that it does little for the situation. I prefer nearness in redundancy which multiple providers, which lends itself to /24 or larger public IP space and BGP type protocol. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:31 PM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers OSPF On April 16, 2015 1:46:50 PM AKDT, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net mailto:sterl...@avative.net wrote: Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net mailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com http://www.ics-il.com/ https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.com mailto:ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net mailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
I guess I didn't understand what you were saying... and still don't. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net To: af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 8:31:11 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Nice, but pretty much the same as OSPF or anything else besides actual BGP in the scenario below. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 7:21 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers MPLS would re-route the traffic. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net To: af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:46:50 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: blockquote pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: blockquote Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: blockquote There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
OSPF On April 16, 2015 1:46:50 PM AKDT, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net wrote: Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.commailto:ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.commailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
I mean for the path redundancy On April 16, 2015 2:31:27 PM AKDT, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: OSPF On April 16, 2015 1:46:50 PM AKDT, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net wrote: Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.commailto:ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.commailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
OSPF works if you have a truly geographically diverse ring redundancy path. Barring that it does little for the situation. I prefer nearness in redundancy which multiple providers, which lends itself to /24 or larger public IP space and BGP type protocol. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:31 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers OSPF On April 16, 2015 1:46:50 PM AKDT, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.netmailto:sterl...@avative.net wrote: Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.commailto:ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.commailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
You do get one more as the local (or remote, I forget which side) address of the PPPoE session can just be the router's loopback, letting you use the whole block. If you run out, just ask ARIN for more. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Mathew Howard mhoward...@gmail.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 12:27:50 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: blockquote pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: blockquote Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: blockquote There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: blockquote For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com /blockquote /blockquote -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. /blockquote /blockquote
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
MPLS would re-route the traffic. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net To: af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:46:50 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: blockquote pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: blockquote Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: blockquote There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: blockquote For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com /blockquote /blockquote -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Nice, but pretty much the same as OSPF or anything else besides actual BGP in the scenario below. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 7:21 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers MPLS would re-route the traffic. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.netmailto:sterl...@avative.net To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:46:50 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Which isn’t really good for redundancy on fixed IP assignments (whether they be DHCP or PPPoE) because a break in the traffic near the site would require a redundant connection near the site to carry the minimal /24 or larger public block. Or you resort to temporary NAT, or re-assignment. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:28 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Terminating PPPoE at the tower doesn't really give you much advantage over DHCP as far as using limited IP space more efficiently though, you're still going to have to assign a subnet to each tower, more or less the same as you would with DHCP. if the goal is to use limited IP space more efficiently, you really need to centralize PPPoE so you can use the same IP pool for everything. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.commailto:ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.commailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com *To: *af af@afmug.com *Sent: *Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian http://facebook.com/packetflux http://twitter.com/@packetflux
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com *To: *af af@afmug.com *Sent: *Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian http://facebook.com/packetflux http://twitter.com/@packetflux -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Just enable the PPPoE server on the routers already at your towers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Eric Muehleisen ericm...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06:36 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: blockquote Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: blockquote There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: blockquote For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com /blockquote /blockquote -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. /blockquote
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
We’ve been begging Mikrotik for LAC/LNS functionality for years. YEARS. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:07 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL _ From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 mailto:forre...@imach.com forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com/ http://www.packetflux.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian http://facebook.com/packetflux http://twitter.com/@packetflux http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_compose http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_activeuid=e965778f9a351fad7a8a860dffc144ce http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_activeuid=e965778f9a351fad7a8a860dffc144ce -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
We have MTs at all sites, and simply terminate PPPoE right there ☺ From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:21 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers We have two Redback SE 600's. VERY expensive. So a L2 path back to the core across the entire network can be concerning coming from a routed network. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.orgmailto:p...@paulstewart.org wrote: DHCP needs layer2 broadcast as well to setup Discovery … sometimes the difference is when folks are using the immediate upstream router for DHCP. Depending on hardware, the immediate upstream could be a BRAS as well ☺ So not sure why that would be a deal breaker really? From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:07 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.commailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.comhttp://www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345tel:406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.commailto:forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.comhttp://www.packetflux.com/ [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/linkedin.png]http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
We use DHCP assign directly to customer routers. This is usually from a full /24 at the router/site. The intention is to be able to BGP that site out multiple providers in case one fails. The switches have DHCP filters/snooping etc that handle rouge. I’ve yet to implement relay, that is coming. And I’ve yet to implement a scavenge that takes new MAC to IP allocations in the block and assign them to customers. I do use the switch or transceiver function to limit one MAC to the port so they only get the one public IP no matter what they plug in. Filtering at the port for local protocoals to drop them. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:31 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.comhttp://www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
We have two Redback SE 600's. VERY expensive. So a L2 path back to the core across the entire network can be concerning coming from a routed network. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org wrote: DHCP needs layer2 broadcast as well to setup Discovery … sometimes the difference is when folks are using the immediate upstream router for DHCP. Depending on hardware, the immediate upstream could be a BRAS as well J So not sure why that would be a deal breaker really? *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Eric Muehleisen *Sent:* Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:07 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [image: http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png] https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[image: http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png] https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[image: http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png] https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[image: http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png] https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com *To: *af af@afmug.com *Sent: *Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- *Forrest Christian* *CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com [image: https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/linkedin.png] http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian [image: https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/facebook.png] http://facebook.com/packetflux [image: https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/twitter.png] http://twitter.com/@packetflux [image: http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_compose][image: http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_activeuid=e965778f9a351fad7a8a860dffc144ce][image: http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_activeuid
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Sorry to hear you are running Redback :) I never liked them much but haven’t touched one since the old SMS500 and SMS1800 days (long before Ericsson bought them). We are migrating from E320 boxes over to MX480 in my world but that’s 99% cable/dsl subs. I did build out a network at one point (former job) where it was originally smaller Cisco boxes at each wireless site doing PPPOE. This became cumbersome to manage all the IP pools along with some other challenges. So we migrated to a pure VLAN model at all the wireless sites and hauled the PPPOE VLAN back to centralized MX480 via MPLS network (RSVP-TE, L2VPN) and that worked very well – roughly 3500 subs across 36 sites at the time. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:21 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers We have two Redback SE 600's. VERY expensive. So a L2 path back to the core across the entire network can be concerning coming from a routed network. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org mailto:p...@paulstewart.org wrote: DHCP needs layer2 broadcast as well to setup Discovery … sometimes the difference is when folks are using the immediate upstream router for DHCP. Depending on hardware, the immediate upstream could be a BRAS as well :) So not sure why that would be a deal breaker really? From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:07 PM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net mailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL _ From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
PPPOE is a solution the same as DHCP is. It provides a method to provide a dynamic (or static) IP address to a customer. IP address referring to typically a public IP address (/32 or /128). I have never seen it referenced as a solution for limited IP space to be honest… PPPOE has authentication where typical DHCP does not (yes, I know there’s lot of ways to do it as well). The client sends a PPPOE request (authentication) and verifies username/password and then assigns the IP address to the customer (nothing to do with DHCP – at least on IPv4). It is a tunnel per say and adds 8 bytes of overhead making the traditional PPPOE connection at 1492 MTU vs 1500. Almost all modern routers account for this 8 bytes – greater than 10 years ago there were lots of issues with this. The tunnel is like a VPN tunnel per say but less overhead and no encryption. Yes /32 is assigned at customer endpoint (which is where you want it). The client knows where the PPPOE server is as part of the negotiation process when your router says it wants to connect. Much like DHCP, there is a discovery process involved. PPPOE “server” is typically a router – one with descent resources (sometimes called a BRAS). PPPOE has advantages and a slight amount of additional complexity – but not much in my opinion. Some of the other advantages are things like tunneling support (l2tp) and setting up multiple realms (users with @abc.com get routed to network X while users with @xyz.com get routed to network Z). Also, PPPOE is very popular in wholesale network situations as well. Hope this helps! Paul From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:06 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net mailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL _ From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
DHCP needs layer2 broadcast as well to setup Discovery … sometimes the difference is when folks are using the immediate upstream router for DHCP. Depending on hardware, the immediate upstream could be a BRAS as well :) So not sure why that would be a deal breaker really? From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:07 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net mailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL _ From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 mailto:forre...@imach.com forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com/ http://www.packetflux.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian http://facebook.com/packetflux http://twitter.com/@packetflux http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_compose http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_activeuid=e965778f9a351fad7a8a860dffc144ce http://ws-stats.appspot.com/t/pixel.png?e=setup_page_outlook_activeuid=e965778f9a351fad7a8a860dffc144ce -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
The labor, hassle, reputation hit, etc for trying to get 1700+ customers to change technical things on their gear would be extensive. On April 15, 2015 2:24:18 AM AKDT, Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org wrote: Why avoid PPPoE? Don’t want to deal with the authentication component? Just curious… /30’s – maybe use /31’s ? From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:33 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
PPPoE auth is broadcast. This will require a L2 path back to you PPPoE server (BRAS). This is a deal breaker for many. Overhead is minimal. There will be a some broadcast chatter on your L2 subnet. This can be filtered a number of ways and usually not a concern. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: pppoe has been discussed quite often as a solution for limited IP space. Could someone give a breakdown of the required components from the edge of the network to the customer and the required topology? My understanding, which is probably wrong, is a client on the network connects, the device gets an IP, normally DHCP that can communicate all the way back to the pppoe server (what exactly is this) The credentials are provided and a pppoe session is established, all traffic flows through the pppoe tunnel and exits at the edge of the network the tunnel is essentially a vpn tunnel? there are overheads that need to be accounted for? Where is the public IP actually at? is it assigned as essentially a /32 at the customer end of the tunnel? How does the client device know where the pppoe server is, is this provided in the DHCP response? I know my understanding of this is probably totally way off, but I would love to know more, accurately On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Which is why we played with it. In the end, it seemed that the amount of support hassles with pppoe wasn't worth the hassle. But, this was a while ago and pppoe has grown up a lot, so my opinion is probably not valid anymore. On Apr 15, 2015 5:27 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com *To: *af af@afmug.com *Sent: *Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian http://facebook.com/packetflux http://twitter.com/@packetflux -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Sterling when you say: I do use the switch or transceiver function to limit one MAC to the port so they only get the one public IP no matter what they plug in How and with what gear are you doing this? -Ty On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.net wrote: We use DHCP assign directly to customer routers. This is usually from a full /24 at the router/site. The intention is to be able to BGP that site out multiple providers in case one fails. The switches have DHCP filters/snooping etc that handle rouge. I’ve yet to implement relay, that is coming. And I’ve yet to implement a scavenge that takes new MAC to IP allocations in the block and assign them to customers. I do use the switch or transceiver function to limit one MAC to the port so they only get the one public IP no matter what they plug in. Filtering at the port for local protocoals to drop them. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie *Sent:* Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:31 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
On the SWOS it is called Port Lock I believe. We use SWOS enabled RB260GS as transceivers for filtering, shaping and port MAC lock etc. In regular switches like the Dell 6200 series and Force10 the features are a lot more advanced and have different names. I don’t remember off hand what would do the same thing effectively limiting to one MAC. But these switches have lots of DHCP guard features against intrusion and rogue servers etc. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ty Featherling Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:29 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Sterling when you say: I do use the switch or transceiver function to limit one MAC to the port so they only get the one public IP no matter what they plug in How and with what gear are you doing this? -Ty On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Sterling Jacobson sterl...@avative.netmailto:sterl...@avative.net wrote: We use DHCP assign directly to customer routers. This is usually from a full /24 at the router/site. The intention is to be able to BGP that site out multiple providers in case one fails. The switches have DHCP filters/snooping etc that handle rouge. I’ve yet to implement relay, that is coming. And I’ve yet to implement a scavenge that takes new MAC to IP allocations in the block and assign them to customers. I do use the switch or transceiver function to limit one MAC to the port so they only get the one public IP no matter what they plug in. Filtering at the port for local protocoals to drop them. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:31 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.comhttp://www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Yes, public IP's to customers via PPPOE. Topology is basically hub and spoke - one main site feeding several regional sites. Then all main sites connected together. VLAN based layer2 network. Paul -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:21 PM To: af@afmug.com; WISPA General List Subject: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Why avoid PPPoE? Don’t want to deal with the authentication component? Just curious… /30’s – maybe use /31’s ? From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:33 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Right … haven’t seen a router in years that didn’t support PPPoE ;) From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:43 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers And then customer router has to support PPPoE and we give them the username and other info for the session, correct? Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:41 PM, Rhys Cuff (Latrobe I.T) wrote: I do PPPoE you don’t need /30’s Just the single IP via the tunnel, local IP can be anything From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2015 10:33 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Haven’t seen one in 10+ years that didn’t support PPPoE … many areas of Europe and Canada it’s very common compared to USA… From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:45 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Do any routers not support PPPoE? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL _ From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:43:14 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers And then customer router has to support PPPoE and we give them the username and other info for the session, correct? Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:41 PM, Rhys Cuff (Latrobe I.T) wrote: I do PPPoE you don’t need /30’s Just the single IP via the tunnel, local IP can be anything From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2015 10:33 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
(WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian http://facebook.com/packetflux http://twitter.com/@packetflux
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
We used to assign /25 to segments and use DHCP with isolation turned on on AP. Once we built out a secondary path from a different location we had to renumber it all to a /24 since none would route something that small. Aggregation proved tricky as it depended on where things broke as to if it was even possible. We got the ip's and made the change. On Apr 14, 2015 7:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
There are reasons to have PPPoE other than IP address assignment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: af af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:02:50 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers (WISP HAT ON) We have a subnet (or a couple of subnets, as sites have grown) at each tower, and an public IP statically assigned to each customer. The radio gets a managment address out of 172.[16-31].x.x which corresponds to the public IP address. No DHCP anywhere, no PPPoE. But again, we have an /18 and a /19 assigned to us from back before NAT really existed and DHCP implementations from the early '90's kinda sucked. We've played with PPPoE and DHCP, but kinda have been spoiled by the simplicity and reliability of a statically numbered network. -forrest On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com -- Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Do any routers not support PPPoE? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:43:14 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers And then customer router has to support PPPoE and we give them the username and other info for the session, correct? Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:41 PM, Rhys Cuff (Latrobe I.T) wrote: I do PPPoE you don’t need /30’s Just the single IP via the tunnel, local IP can be anything From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2015 10:33 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: blockquote I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com /blockquote
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
And then customer router has to support PPPoE and we give them the username and other info for the session, correct? Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:41 PM, Rhys Cuff (Latrobe I.T) wrote: I do PPPoE you don’t need /30’s Just the single IP via the tunnel, local IP can be anything *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds *Sent:* Wednesday, 15 April 2015 10:33 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Hi, Back in the day (2+ years ago), we did a /27 to each tower and then statically assigned an IP from that block to each customer. Then we knew exactly which customer had what IP address (tracking, throttling, disabling, subpoenas, etc) and it made it simple on the customer router for configuration. Travis On 4/14/2015 6:41 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Yeah, we want to drop an ip off right at the customer router, but we also don't want to add a layer of NAT to them, nor track the damn macs of all of these customers. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:36 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: PPPoE to NATed CPE for most. Some are static IP directly on non-consumer routers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *af@afmug.com, WISPA General List wirel...@wispa.org *Sent: *Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:20:34 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
PPPoE to NATed CPE for most. Some are static IP directly on non-consumer routers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: af@afmug.com, WISPA General List wirel...@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:20:34 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
I do PPPoE you don’t need /30’s Just the single IP via the tunnel, local IP can be anything From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2015 10:33 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers Trying to avoid PPPoE, for one. Also want to not do a bunch of /30's everywhere like we are now. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:30 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: I use DHCP on my fiber network and PPPoE on wireless. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
Yeah, we want to drop an ip off right at the customer router, but we also don't want to add a layer of NAT to them, nor track the damn macs of all of these customers. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:36 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: PPPoE to NATed CPE for most. Some are static IP directly on non-consumer routers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *af@afmug.com, WISPA General List wirel...@wispa.org *Sent: *Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:20:34 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
I agree, I don't want to burn a /30 for every business that wants a block. I do a /26 at the tower, then route a /29 or whatever to the customer. We can give them a backup link, even to another core router, and set route metrics, gateway checks, etc. appropriately. Or hell, use OSPF or BGP if we really need to, but most of the time it isn't necessary. On 4/14/2015 8:05 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, Back in the day (2+ years ago), we did a /27 to each tower and then statically assigned an IP from that block to each customer. Then we knew exactly which customer had what IP address (tracking, throttling, disabling, subpoenas, etc) and it made it simple on the customer router for configuration. Travis On 4/14/2015 6:41 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Yeah, we want to drop an ip off right at the customer router, but we also don't want to add a layer of NAT to them, nor track the damn macs of all of these customers. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:36 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: PPPoE to NATed CPE for most. Some are static IP directly on non-consumer routers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *af@afmug.com, WISPA General List wirel...@wispa.org *Sent: *Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:20:34 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com
Re: [AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers
We still do this today :) Makes administration easier and can pin point problems easily. On 4/14/2015 8:05 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, Back in the day (2+ years ago), we did a /27 to each tower and then statically assigned an IP from that block to each customer. Then we knew exactly which customer had what IP address (tracking, throttling, disabling, subpoenas, etc) and it made it simple on the customer router for configuration. Travis On 4/14/2015 6:41 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Yeah, we want to drop an ip off right at the customer router, but we also don't want to add a layer of NAT to them, nor track the damn macs of all of these customers. Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 04/14/2015 04:36 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: PPPoE to NATed CPE for most. Some are static IP directly on non-consumer routers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *af@afmug.com, WISPA General List wirel...@wispa.org *Sent: *Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:20:34 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Providing public routed IPs to customers For those of you currently providing public/routed ips to customers? What is your topology like and delivery method? Looking at doing a few things, have considered a few options, and wanted to look out there and see what other people are doing. Thanks -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com --
