[c-nsp] single static ip address for customer(s)

[Ross Halliday]

This is an ideal use case for PPPoE. We just return RADIUS attribute Framed-IP-Address to the access concentrator and off they go! As long as a subscriber can get to PPPoE they can get that IP... doesn't even need to be the same service type. IP allocation is as easy as a drop-down menu that selects from a block of reserved IPs.

Personally I've never understood why DSL providers don't use PPPoE. DHCP just seems like so much hassle, even with Option 82

Our next service level above that is a /30 or a /29 over T1, ethernet, etc.

Cheers
Ross


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Aaron
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 2:42 PM
> To: 'Gert Doering'; 'Andrew Jones'
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] single static ip address for customer(s)
> 
> Hi all, I'm the origin of this question (I'm not sure if I should be
> admitting that or not)  (lol)
> 
> Did you'll think when I said" customers" that I meant customers with
> networks ?  (I guess I'm asking this now based on some of the responses
> I've
> seen)  please forgive me if I wasn't clear enough initially....
> 
> Please know that when I say "single static ip address for customer(s)"
> in my
> subject heading, I mean a residential dsl subscriber with a windows
> computer
> sitting on his desk in his master bedroom and he bought a single static
> ip
> address from me (the isp I work for).  This is the context of my
> question.
> 
> So consider this....
> 
> Guy with windows pc with single static ip on
> it--------------dslam--------cisco 3750------cisco
> 4500---------7609-----------internet
> 
> I have a collapsed IP core architecture pretty much whereas the default
> gateway for my customer is on the 7609.....so pretty flat from customer
> all
> the way to my core gw (7609) that acts both as the def gw for customers
> AND
> as the termination of an internet pos oc48...bam, customer has one
> router
> hop and his in att cloud on the internet.
> 
> we are gonna do this type of thing soon....
> 
> Guy with windows pc with single static ip on
> it--------------dslam--------cisco me3600x(pe)---mpls---cisco
> asr9k(p)-----9k(p)-----(more
> p's)----9k(pe)-------same7609-----------internet
> 
> So I'm gonna have to do an mpls l2vpn (vpXs) to cause that single
> static
> customer to maintain his single static ip such that I can maintain
> bcast
> domain consistency back into the 7609 where that original bcast domain
> for
> that subnet that the cutomer is on to remain intact.
> 
> I posed this question to y'all wondering if y'all know of anything
> other
> isp's do to solve single static deals like this.
> 
> But maybe the answer is exactly what I'm already planning on
> doing....mpls
> l2vpn, etc.
> 
> Thanks
> Aaron
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gert Doering
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 9:41 AM
> To: Andrew Jones
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] single static ip address for customer(s)
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 03:02:58PM +1000, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > I think may I deleted the original post(s) in this thread, but has
> anyone
> mentioned LISP.
> >
> > Seems like a perfect use case for it.
> 
> Yay, tunnels, to compensate for lack of routing clue.
> 
> (Did I mention we changed one of our upstream providers due to
> excessive
> MPLS tunneling, combined with excessive lack of clue?)
> 
> Anyway.  I don't see why this is supposed to be difficult, unless
> you're
> dealing with /32- or /64-routes in the order of "50.000 or more".
> 
>  - give every router a network block, announce that block as *block*
> into
>    your internal routing (iBGP), do not announce more specifics
> 
>  - if that customer ever ends up on a different box, just permit the
> /32
> 
>  - if most of the customers never move to different POPs, and you don't
>    have to split routers too often, customer churn will make sure that
>    most of your customers will still stick to the "aggregation router"
> 
>  - in case you really have to split a router into multiple routers due
>    to capacity reason, announce the aggregate from both, announce the
>    more specifics to the local "to core" router, limit propagation from
>    there.  Yes, somewhat painful for the inital setup, or when you add
>    network blocks.  Trivial if properly maintained and documented.
> 
> gert
> --
> USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
> 
> //www.muc.de/~gert/
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
> gert at greenie.muc.de
> fax: +49-89-35655025
> gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/