Re: FTTH CPE landscape

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Aug 5, 2011, at 8:13 AM, Scott Helms wrote:

> > You say waste, I say perfectly valid use.
>
> Its waste to carve out of that many subnets without a good reason (and no the reason presented so far are NOT 
> compelling, IPSEC works perfectly over a bridged interface).
> > > 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?
> > Why is it less of a waste to allocate a /30 to a business using a single public
> > IP than it is to a residence? This makes no sense to me.
> >
> > I simply prefer the additional troubleshooting and other capabilities given
> > to me in a routed environment in most cases.
> If you want that then you need to run a router not have a /30 routed over your WAN interface.  Its far better for 
> your WAN interface to be part of a much larger subnet that we can in turn route a network to.

I was speaking from the service provider perspective. If I deploy CPE to a customer, I want it to be a router, not a 
bridge.

Owen

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: