Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv6 end user addressing
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:09:10 -0700


On Aug 11, 2011, at 2:53 PM, Scott Helms wrote:

On 8/11/2011 5:28 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
You're talking about the front end residential gateway that you manage. I'm talking about
the various gateways and things you might not yet expect to provide gateways that residential
end users will deploy on their own within their environments.

The question I asked you is why should I as the service provider deploy routers rather than bridges as CPE gear for 
residential customers.  If you didn't understand the question or didn't want to address that specific questions 
that's fine, but you certainly didn't answer that question.


I think i did below. However, in my region of the world, most service providers don't provide the
CPE and most customers are BYOB.

Of course, in order for the ISP to properly support these things in the home, the ISP
needs to terminate some form of IPv6 on some form of CPE head-end router in the
home to which he will (statically or otherwise) route the /48 whether it is statically
assigned or configured via DHCPv6-PD.

What is a CPE head-end router?  That seems like an oxymoron.  Where would such an animal live, in the home or the 
head end/central office?  Who is responsible for purchasing it and managing it in your mind?


In the home and the consumer is responsible. The fact that you utterly want to avoid
the concept of topology in the home shows me that you really aren't understanding
where things already are in many homes and where they are going in the future.

ISP->CPE Head End Router-><Multiple additional routers and other deivces some of which have additional routers and or 
topology behind them.

Some definitions of the above pseudo-diagram already exist in many people's
homes (and I am including Joe six-pack in this) today.

Lots of users string wired and wireless routers together in multiple layers with and
without NAT in various (and often creative albeit not necessarily constructive) ways
within their homes.

Today, all of that is hidden from you because their CPE head end router (the one
that talks to your supplied bridge in most cases) NATs it all behind one address.

In the future, it will be semi-visible in that you'll see the additional addresses, but,
you still won't have to do anything about it because it's routed and all you have
to do is deliver the /48 instead of delivering the /128 (equivalent of the /32 you
deliver today).

Owen


Owen

On Aug 11, 2011, at 1:28 PM, Scott Helms wrote:

Owen,

   The fact that you're immediately going to routing means you don't understand the problem.  The costs I'm talking 
about don't have anything to do with routing or any of the core gear and everything to do with the pieces at the 
customer premise.  Routers cost more to purchase than bridges because there is more complexity (silicon&  
software).  Routers also cost more to manage for a service provider in almost all cases for residential customers.  
There are reasons to deploy routing CPE in some cases (the use cases are increasing with IP video in DOCSIS 
systems) but they are still very nascent.

On 8/10/2011 7:24 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I'm pretty sure that I understand those things reasonably well. I'm quite certain that it doesn't
cost an ISP significantly more to deploy /48s than /56s as addresses don't have much of a
cost and there is little or no difficulty in obtaining large allocations for ISPs that have lots of
residential users. The difference between handing a user's CPE a /56 and a /48 will not make
for significant difference in support costs, either, other than the possible additional costs of
the phone calls when users start to discover that /56s were not enough.


Owen

On Aug 10, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Scott Helms wrote:

Tim,

   Hence the "might".  I worry when people start throwing around terms like routing in the home that they don't 
understand the complexities of balancing the massive CPE installed base, technical features, end user support, 
ease of installation&   managemenet, and (perhaps most importantly) the economics of mass adoption.  This one of 
the choices that made DSL deployments more complex and expensive than DOCSIS cable deployments which in turn 
caused the CEO of AT&T to say their entire DSL network is obsolete.
http://goo.gl/exwqu



On 8/10/2011 12:57 PM, Tim Chown wrote:
On 10 Aug 2011, at 16:11, Scott Helms wrote:

Neither of these are true, though in the future we _might_ have deployable technology that allows for automated 
routing setup (though I very seriously doubt it) in the home.  Layer 2 isolation is both easier and more 
reliable than attempting it at layer 3 which is isolation by agreement, i.e. it doesn't really exist.
Well, there is some new effort on this in the homenet WG in IETF.

For snooping IPv6 multicast it's MLD snooping rather than IGMP.  We use it in our enterprise since we have 
multiple multicast video channels in use.

Tim

On 8/10/2011 9:02 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Bridging eliminates the multicast isolation that you get from routing.

This is not a case for bridging, it's a case for making it possible to do real
routing in the home and we now have the space and the technology to
actually do it in a meaningful and sufficiently automatic way as to be
applicable to Joe 6-Mac.

-- 
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------


-- 
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------


-- 
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------



-- 
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]