nanog mailing list archives
Re: FTTH CPE landscape
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 10:59:41 -0700
On Aug 5, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----From: "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com>It differs from a bridge in that *it requires a chunk of routable IP space to put behind it*, and a route to go there. For the specific situation I posited, a consumer connection, you can get a static IP, but you *will not* get routable space; you have to go to a business connection for that, at 2-4 times the cost.That really depends on the ISP, doesn't it?Sure. If you'd prefer, substitute "large, consumer ISP -- on the order of Verizon DSL or Road Runner". Both of those have told me that in the past, and, these days, I don't think they're unrepresentative of the common case.
Sure, but, there's more than one way to solve the problem. Owen
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape, (continued)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Scott Helms (Aug 05)
- RE: FTTH CPE landscape Jamie Bowden (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 04)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Tom Hill (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Kenneth Ratliff (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Jay Ashworth (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Jay Ashworth (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Owen DeLong (Aug 05)
- RE: FTTH CPE landscape Eric Wieling (Aug 05)
- Re: FTTH CPE landscape Jason Lixfeld (Aug 04)