nanog mailing list archives
Re: FTTH CPE landscape
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 14:32:22 -0700
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/FirewallHobby horse: please make sure it support bridge mode? Those of us who 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 FiOS 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 they be able to terminate IPSec VPNs? Note I did say TRANSPARENT router. That would mean no NAT and routed static IPv4. Owen
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description:
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)