[AusNOG] Looks like the NBN will be a PON variant for sure...

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

On 29/04/2009, at 2:31 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
>
> However, a per-user VLAN might be nice too if the aggregation can be  
> sorted out (imagine BIG vlan rewrite switches!).
>

There are precedents for doing this - some countries moved to this  
model from ATM PVC per customer.

However, it does strike me that a per vlan model would burn a /30 for  
each customer rather than a /32 - in a world where IPv4 addresses  
might become quite valuable for a time do you really want to increase  
a cost by four times just to get rid of PPPoE?

Again, I'm not for or against here, but just pointing out the issues  
that I've thought of when considering this previously.

Per-vlan means, of course, that you can run PPPoE or static depending  
on what the customer wants/desires.  So if it's achieveable then it's  
quite likely to be a good middle ground.   As JSL points out - it does  
mean you can run video/voip natively and PPPoE for internet access.


MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Networks, Internode/Agile
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: mmc at internode.com.au    Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909		     Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999        Fax: +61-8-8235-6909

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20090429/059b3f99/attachment.html>