To vent my today's frustrations…
-
@argv_minus_one @louis my old ISP did not do any PPPoE. IPv4 was static, IPv6 was plain DHCPv6-PD.
-
I think the point of PPPoE is so the ISP can tell which packets belong to which subscriber when the medium is shared (PON, fiber-to-the-node, DSL, etc).
Although my current ISP is somehow providing me with fiber service that uses plain old DHCP and Ethernet. Which I love and cherish very much. But I'm sure it'll be PPPoE o'clock again if I ever move or if the ONT ever needs replacement.
@argv_minus_one the funny part is that our current ISP (it's not their choice to use PPPoE, from what i heard of them they don't like it either) the username and password are uvt.
At least PON has it's own mechanisms to identify subscriber.
-
@argv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.org idk to be honest
it really depends on what the ISP wants to achieve and their architecture
I've seen ISPs (in my country at least) phase-out PPPoE in favor of IPoE, keeping the former as part of their legacy infra. Two major french ISPs are now using IPoE with DHCP (for both v4 and v6), and I believe the rest of them are as well, but I can't say for sure without digging documentation
@erindesu@tech.lgbt -
To vent my today's frustrations…
@erindesu you can have MTU 1540 with PPPoE as of... *checks notes* last week https://github.com/ppp-project/ppp/commit/f691c224e12ee13a1b317a1838d150f1ffef14a1
-
I think the point of PPPoE is so the ISP can tell which packets belong to which subscriber when the medium is shared (PON, fiber-to-the-node, DSL, etc).
Although my current ISP is somehow providing me with fiber service that uses plain old DHCP and Ethernet. Which I love and cherish very much. But I'm sure it'll be PPPoE o'clock again if I ever move or if the ONT ever needs replacement.
@argv_minus_one @erindesu 1500 MTU within PPPoE is standardized and possible, just needs turning on.
-
@argv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.org if you want to learn more about it, I really recommend this DENOG conference about PPPoE vs IPoE for ISPs
https://youtu.be/36TgDD-g-3k
@erindesu@tech.lgbt@louis @argv_minus_one @erindesu Yes! This! PPPoE definitly has a place, and if the ISP implements rfc4638 correctly, the major problem of mtu1492 is already gone. -
To vent my today's frustrations…
@erindesu Ah, yes, MTU 1492, or as it is better known: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1492:_Conquest_of_Paradise
-
I think the point of PPPoE is so the ISP can tell which packets belong to which subscriber when the medium is shared (PON, fiber-to-the-node, DSL, etc).
Although my current ISP is somehow providing me with fiber service that uses plain old DHCP and Ethernet. Which I love and cherish very much. But I'm sure it'll be PPPoE o'clock again if I ever move or if the ONT ever needs replacement.
@argv_minus_one @erindesu My fiber connection is just Ethernet, and so were my VDSL connection (back in 2007) and cable before that. Never had to suffer PPPoE at home.
-
To vent my today's frustrations…
@erindesu I wonder what the global collective extra energy usage is due to PPPoE!
-
To vent my today's frustrations…
@erindesu I'm with you, but also I'm plagued with DOCSIS currently.
-
@erindesu I'm with you, but also I'm plagued with DOCSIS currently.
@wonka oh no DOCSIS. I would rather pick VDSL than that.
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
