nanog mailing list archives
Re: FTTH CPE landscape
From: Scott Helms <khelms () ispalliance net>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 18:07:40 -0400
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 customers you have and that's bordering on mismanagement of your address space. 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 you trying to cut down on a large broadcast domain?
Any rational layer 2 access gear regardless of the technology (DSL, FTTx, wireless, or DOCSIS) will/can handle layer 2 isolation already.
-- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms --------------------------------
Current thread:
- FTTH CPE landscape Jason Lixfeld (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Jay Ashworth (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 04)
- RE: FTTH CPE landscape Nathan Eisenberg (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Jay Ashworth (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Dan White (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Scott Helms (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Dan Armstrong (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape PC (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Scott Helms (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Jay Ashworth (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape PC (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Jay Ashworth (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Cutler James R (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Scott Helms (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 05)
