nanog mailing list archives
Re: SIP on FTTH systems
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 10:18:00 +0200
On Friday, February 07, 2014 09:11:38 AM Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
Violent agreement. Customers should not talk L2 directly to each other using local switching, but they should be able to send IP packets to each other.
And in fairness, given the positive security benefits (barring extreme corner cases or hardware/software bugs), the otherwise sub-optimal tromboning between homes via the BNG is an acceptable compromise. Mark.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Current thread:
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems, (continued)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Anders Löwinger (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mark Tinka (Feb 06)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Anders Löwinger (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mark Tinka (Feb 07)
- RE: SIP on FTTH systems Frank Bulk (Feb 06)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Jay Ashworth (Feb 06)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 06)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Jay Ashworth (Feb 06)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 06)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mark Tinka (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Anders Löwinger (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mark Tinka (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 07)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mark Tinka (Feb 08)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Anders Löwinger (Feb 11)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 11)
- Re: SIP on FTTH systems Anders Löwinger (Feb 11)
- RE: SIP on FTTH systems Frank Bulk (Feb 11)
- RE: SIP on FTTH systems Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 11)