[nsp] PPPoE xDSL Termination Benefits? (was Total PVC's per router ..)

[Ejay Hire]

For Hundreds of PVC's, PPoE/A allows much better scalability and flexibility.  

Consider these options:

ISP1 doesn't use PPoa/e.  They have hundreds of subinterfaces, with hundreds of /30's and hundreds of static routes.  A show-running config takes about 5 minutes.  If a customer relocates, they delete the old subinterface and recreate it on the new pvc (At least 10 commands).  If a customer cancels they have to manually remove the PVC (and the static routes, and the access-lists... a minimum of 6 commands).

ISP2 uses PPoa/e.  They can support all of the features of ISP 1, and only have to create a virtual Template interface and maintain a Radius server.  If ISP2 is already using radius for dial access, then the transition is even easier.  If a customer relocates, they turn up a pVC to the new sites, a nd no configuration changes are necessary.  If a customer cancels, they delete the radius profile (A single database record).

The best thing about radius is the ease of automation.  For a script to autoconfigure a router is fairly complex, and requires at least a partial rewrtie for every type of equipment.  For a script to write a line to a database is easy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Loftis [mailto:mloftis at wgops.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 11:03 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [nsp] PPPoE xDSL Termination Benefits? (was Total PVC's per
router ..)


I've personally always had a hard time understanding what the benefits are 
of using PPPoE for xDSL connectivity.

Anyoen care to elaborate on why one would prefer that over say static IPs 
or DHCP or say routed?

I know I probably sound like a bumpkin asking, but I really would like to 
know.  If you feel it's off-topic feel free to respond directly to me 
off-list.  If there is interest I will summarize provided there are no 
objections.

--On Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:21 PM -0600 Charles Hardin 
<chardin at centurytel.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We're currently running trial tests for PPPoE connectivity strictly off
> an ATM DS3 port on a 7206VXR 400. So far, we're hitting the 200
> subscriber mark and running around 2% on CPU processes. The max VC's per
> DS3 port, so we've been told, is at 4k. This box will supposedly support
> "TWO" ATM DS3's with a max total of 8k active VC's. We hope to run up our
> subscriber totals on this box and test its performance. Based on how this
> box preforms, we may be tempted to trial the NPE-G1 in the near future
> for PPPoE termination. We use Redbacks currently for all production ADSL
> PPPoE service nodes we manage.
>
> Thanks,
> Charles

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/