Mailing List Archive: nsp: juniper

Re: [c-nsp] Broadband Model suggestion?

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

ihsan at grep

Jul 12, 2012, 6:37 AM

Post #1 of 5 (431 views)
Permalink

Re: [c-nsp] Broadband Model suggestion?

Hi,

On Jul 12, 2012, at 3:01 PM, Frank Norman wrote:
> ...
>
> Now can someone tell me
>
> 1) what are the standard models (PPPoE or DHCP ? ) that are being used in
> such kind of broadband networks?? and which is more flexible??

Both are fine from protocol perspective. I've used both and DHCP is slightly more work if you need IPv6 as if you want to use the equivalent of option82 in DHCPv4, I'd wager support for the equivalent in DHCPv6 i.e. RFC3315/3993/3649 are incomplete, at least for 3 major GPON mfgs from China.

My personal preference would be DHCP as this would allow subs to forget about remembering PPPoE login info altogether which was a big deal for us handling customer issues.

Our situation was that we had a large number of legacy subs on PPPoE and to switch to IPoE/DHCP would have meant product realignment and customer migrations so we stuck by PPPoE.

>
> 2) How is bandwidth management for subscribers is handled?? through the
> same BRAS or by installation of separate devices like packeteer,
> packetlogic etc

Both sides. The BRAS is responsible for enforcing the parameters sent by the policy manager. Communication can be done typically via RADIUS-CoA or DIAMETER.

>
> 2) Which devices/vendors can handle these kind of requirements?? (We
> already have AAA radius expertise, so i am only concerned with network
> equipment side)

I've had some experiences with the MX but this is one of the areas I think Juniper had a lot to improve as the integration between MX, SRC & VTA (the part that does volume-based tracking) isn't as good or polished as the integration of them with the ERXes.

MX by itself is a fine BRAS but integration with SRC/VTA is just something that is left to be desired.

Starting on 4.2 I think, VTA functionality has been integrated into SRC so there's good chance things have improved.

I've no experience with Cisco ASR1k/9k integration with Openet so I can't really comment on that.

ihsan

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

rs at seastrom

Jul 12, 2012, 8:50 AM

Post #2 of 5 (416 views)
Permalink

Re: [c-nsp] Broadband Model suggestion? [In reply to]

My experience with Zhone (the MALC and their ONTs) was that it was
quite easy to get working and didn't rely on any kind of proprietary
management software which is always a risk when playing in those
areas. Web configuration UI on the ONT was not the most awesome thing
in the world, but it didn't do the "gotta have IE" kind of thing that
I had run into on other devices.

-r

Jared Mauch <jared [at] puck> writes:

> He may be looking for alternative vendors as well. :-)
>
> Zhone has inexpensive CPE hardware. I have a few in my home lab. You can deploy them for a few 100 on the cheap if you already have SMF available. (just under $300 for everything).
>
> Jared Mauch
>
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 4:56 AM, Chris Kawchuk <juniperdude [at] gmail> wrote:
>
>> Your Vendor's Sales Rep and Systems Engineer should be more than happy to help in this regard. =)
>>
>> - CK.
>>
>> On 2012-07-12, at 5:01 PM, Frank Norman wrote:
>>
>>> Dear friends,
>>>
>>> I need suggestion for broadband network based on xDSL & fiber based last
>>> miles (GPON/Metro technologies), Subscriber base upto 40-50 thousand
>>> customer,
>>>
>>> Requirement for subscribers will be;
>>> - Authentication & authorization
>>> - Dynamic Rate-limiting policing (with Multi service support)
>>> - Session state monitoring
>>> - Session Accounting for Billing (prepaid/postpaid)
>>>
>>> and other policies in standard broadband networks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Now can someone tell me
>>>
>>> 1) what are the standard models (PPPoE or DHCP ? ) that are being used in
>>> such kind of broadband networks?? and which is more flexible??
>>>
>>> 2) How is bandwidth management for subscribers is handled?? through the
>>> same BRAS or by installation of separate devices like packeteer,
>>> packetlogic etc
>>>
>>> 2) Which devices/vendors can handle these kind of requirements?? (We
>>> already have AAA radius expertise, so i am only concerned with network
>>> equipment side)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Good Day!
>>>
>>> Frank
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

miquels at cistron

Jul 18, 2012, 1:17 AM

Post #3 of 5 (386 views)
Permalink

Re: [c-nsp] Broadband Model suggestion? [In reply to]

On 12-07-12 3:37 PM, Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 3:01 PM, Frank Norman wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> Now can someone tell me
>>
>> 1) what are the standard models (PPPoE or DHCP ? ) that are being
>> used in such kind of broadband networks?? and which is more
>> flexible??
>
> Both are fine from protocol perspective. I've used both and DHCP is
> slightly more work if you need IPv6 as if you want to use the
> equivalent of option82 in DHCPv4, I'd wager support for the
> equivalent in DHCPv6 i.e. RFC3315/3993/3649 are incomplete, at least
> for 3 major GPON mfgs from China.
>
> My personal preference would be DHCP as this would allow subs to
> forget about remembering PPPoE login info altogether which was a big
> deal for us handling customer issues.

Depends - if the equipment can insert DHCP Option82 into a DHCP
DISCOVER, it might also be able to insert the equivalent PPPoE tag.
That's actually how we authenticate our PPPoE subscribers, we completely
ignore username/password.

The advantage of PPPoE is protocol independence. It made it possible for
us to roll out IPv6 over PPPoE without changes in the last mile.

However, if we could have used the VLAN-per-customer model we probably
wouldn't have bothered with PPPoE.

Disadvantage of both PPPoE and VLAN-per-customer: no effective multicast
(unless you run that in a seperate second shared-VLAN).

Mike.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

mark.tinka at seacom

Sep 16, 2012, 10:25 PM

Post #4 of 5 (301 views)
Permalink

Re: [c-nsp] Broadband Model suggestion? [In reply to]

On Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:17:15 AM Miquel van
Smoorenburg wrote:

> Disadvantage of both PPPoE and VLAN-per-customer: no
> effective multicast (unless you run that in a seperate
> second shared-VLAN).

In our consideration, Multicast would have been a separate
shared VLAN, as it then allows you to run PPPoE for Unicast
access on a separate set of core infrastructure if it were
really necessary, against the same last mile.

But even if Multicast and DHCP Unicast were running on the
same edge router, I'd likely still separate both traffic
types into different VLAN's.

Mark.

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.82 KB)

giuliano at wztech

Sep 17, 2012, 1:04 AM

Post #5 of 5 (298 views)
Permalink

Re: [c-nsp] Broadband Model suggestion? [In reply to]

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads