Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: FTTH CPE landscape
From: PC <paul4004 () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 17:49:48 -0600

IPSEC Not so common.  At least it's easy enough for them to be the
initiator, in most cases, and IPSEC NAT-T works great.

Much more common application would include PC gamers, xbox live, remote
desktop, slingbox, windows home server, and torrents.

Granted, some of these support UPNP (if your router does too...), but others
simply do not do so as easily, or prefer a more static external access

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Dan Armstrong <dan () beanfield com> wrote:

On 2011-08-04, at 6:43 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:

On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:55 PM, Dan White wrote:

On 04/08/11 14:32 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:

On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:08 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com>

On Aug 4, 2011, at 8:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:

- Generic consumer grade NAT/Firewall

Hobby horse: please make sure it support bridge mode? Those of us
want to put our own routers on the wire will hate you otherwise.

Why? As long as it can be a transparent router, why would it need to
be a bridge?

Ask a Verizon FiOS customer who wants to run IPv4 VPNs.

He didn't say IPv6 only, right?

I have a couple of customers who can't get bridge mode on residence
service, and therefore can't run their own routers to terminate IPsec.

If they could get routed static IPv4 rather than bridge, why wouldn't
be able to terminate IPSec VPNs? Note I did say TRANSPARENT router.
That would mean no NAT and routed static IPv4.

For residential use, for users currently requesting one public address,
that's a waste of a /30 block (sans routing tricks requiring higher end
customer equipment). Multiply that by the number of residential
you have and that's bordering on mismanagement of your address space.

You say waste, I say perfectly valid use.

If you're dealing with business customers, then your usage versus wasted
ratio is much higher and less of a concern, but what's the point? Are
trying to cut down on a large broadcast domain?

Why is it less of a waste to allocate a /30 to a business using a single
IP than it is to a residence? This makes no sense to me.

I simply prefer the additional troubleshooting and other capabilities
to me in a routed environment in most cases.


Realistically, how many home Internet consumers terminate IPSec VPNs?

It seems kind of silly to engineer a network around a tiny fraction of less
than 1% of the population, doesn't it?

  By Date           By Thread  

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