IPv6 delivery model to end customers

John Lee john at internetassociatesllc.com
Sat Feb 7 13:24:58 CST 2009


Yes it was definitely last century. With your 30 USD per port and no tunnels poses some interesting challenges. Customer CPE tunnel access was the main method discussed in the different v6 meetings I attended. I appreciate you bringing up this set of requirements since it needs to be addressed for fuller deployment of IPv6 to residential customers.

John

________________________________________
From: Mikael Abrahamsson [swmike at swm.pp.se]
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 1:12 PM
To: John Lee
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: RE: IPv6 delivery model to end customers

On Sat, 7 Feb 2009, John Lee wrote:

> My IPv4 only deployment in 2001 used DSLAMs that had limited number of
> active CPEs and DS3/T3 upstreams to the network. We used front end
> Fore/Marconi ATM switches in front of Redback aggregation switches
> connecting to Cisco 6509s and then GSR 12012s as the backbone routers.
> The Redback authenticated with RADIUS servers using CHAP.

My ADSL2+ design I did in 2002-03 or so, used one vlan per customer in the
DSLAM (first version was 1U 24 port ADSL L2 ethernet DSLAM, second
generation was chassis based ADSL2+ DSLAM did 1024 vlans and had ~800
ADSL2+ ports), vlans aggregated with an L3 switch doing GigE with the
DSLAM, and one IP address per vlan (L3 switch was RFC3069 capable), no
DHCP just statically provisioned when doing customer delivery. Worked
great. Quite cheap as well. DSLAM was basically a L2 PVC->VLAN and PHY
media converter.

But I wasn't talking (A)DSL. DSL is last century. I am talking VDSL2/ETTH.
Security model there is to only have ethernet and IP, no PPP/ATM, no
L2TPv3 or PPPoE. Let's skip the terms BRAS/LNS etc. Anything that
terminates tunnels is expensive (apart from GRE/IPV6IP which the 7600
seems to do very well, but I don't like tunnels. I like native). Most of
the ETTH ports are 10/10, 100/10 or 100/100 (or even higher speeds) and
100/10 costs ~30 USD a month. L2TPv3/PPPoE is not an option.

So, we have ~500k ports in my 9 million inhabitants country which are done
via L2 switches in basements with CAT5/6 or fiber to the home. They use
the security model I talked about before which I didn't really see a
mention of in the list of IPv6 supported access models you listed. There
are probably many millions more in Asia with the same model.

> IMHO rolling out IPv6 to the customer is a business decision now not a
> technical one.

Well, I want to be able to do IPv6 at close to the same cost and security
as I do IPv4 today. In your BRAS/LNS world it might be easy, but that's
not the world I live in.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se



More information about the NANOG mailing list