FTTH CPE landscape

Fri Aug 5 00:22:29 UTC 2011

Among the people I know, on the order of 35%.

Not a majority, but, I would not call 1/3rd less than 1%.

Owen

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:08 PM, Dan Armstrong wrote:

> 
> On 2011-08-04, at 6:43 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:55 PM, Dan White wrote:
>> 
>>> On 04/08/11 14:32 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:08 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com>
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 4, 2011, at 8:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> - Generic consumer grade NAT/Firewall
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hobby horse: please make sure it support bridge mode? Those of us who
>>>>>>> want to put our own routers on the wire will hate you otherwise.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Why? As long as it can be a transparent router, why would it need to
>>>>>> be a bridge?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ask a Verizon FiOS customer who wants to run IPv4 VPNs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> He didn't say IPv6 only, right?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have a couple of customers who can't get bridge mode on residence FiOS
>>>>> service, and therefore can't run their own routers to terminate IPsec.
>>>>> 
>>>> If they could get routed static IPv4 rather than bridge, why wouldn't they
>>>> be able to terminate IPSec VPNs? Note I did say TRANSPARENT router.
>>>> That would mean no NAT and routed static IPv4.
>>> 
>>> For residential use, for users currently requesting one public address,
>>> that's a waste of a /30 block (sans routing tricks requiring higher end
>>> customer equipment). Multiply that by the number of residential customers
>>> you have and that's bordering on mismanagement of your address space.
>>> 
>> You say waste, I say perfectly valid use.
>> 
>>> 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.
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
> 
> Realistically, how many home Internet consumers terminate IPSec VPNs?  
> 
> It seems kind of silly to engineer a network around a tiny fraction of less than 1% of the population, doesn't it?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20110804/a0e0f6c7/attachment.bin>