Re: OT: PPPoEoATM

Most of DSLAMs have Ethernet aggregation ant not ATM.

--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert
FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture
Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 14:59, Joe Astorino <joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Does anybody have a clear explanation as to why many DSL service providers
> prefer to use PPPoEoATM instead of just PPPoATM when terminating DSL on a
> Cisco router? B For example, let's say I have a Cisco router with a DSL (ATM)
> interface for the WAN side of the connection and a standard FastEthernet
> interface facing the users.
>
> When the user sends an IP packet, it is encapsulated in an ethernet frame.
> When it hits the router, the ethernet frame is stripped off and the router
> encapsulates the IP packet into a PPP frame. B NOW...at that point one of two
> things happens -- It can encapsulate the PPP into ATM and send it along the
> way as PPPoATM or it can encapsulate the PPP into ethernet, and THEN
> encapsulate that entire thing into ATM for what amounts to PPPoEoATM. B What
> is the point of the extra ethernet header?
>
> Is this just a compatibility thing because they figure many end users won't
> have "ATM" interfaces and will be interfacing directly from their PC where
> PPPoE might already be there? B It's always bugged me.
>
> Thanks for any input!
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Joe Astorino
> CCIE #24347
> Blog: http://astorinonetworks.com
>
> "He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net