Very Computer

Quote:>I an thinking of getting dsl, but the provider uses pppoe - I don't
>know much about it. I intend to use ipmasqing on the box and have a
>server with several boxes behind it. Now linux 2.4 can use pppoe, but
>does windows need to as well or can linux act as a gateway and
>understand and transfer appropriately? I use tcp/ip internally so I was
>wondering about that. Ideas?

--
Hal B



--

To add to what Mr. Briggs said,

Point To Point Protocol over Ethernet -  ISP's answer to too few ip
addresses ( limited bandwidth ) and too many people wanting them .

You connect the dsl modem to the linux computer. Once a PPPOE client for
linux is installed on it, set it as the gateway, and you'll be fine. Do not
forget firewalling. That Ramen worm is begining to annoy me.

The computers on your lan can be set to "Always Connected" or something .

PPPOE will still use the pppd daemon, since it is an "Emulated Dialup" , and
all the scripts called by pppd when starting and shutting down still apply.

The client I use is from Roaring Penguin.The kernel I use is 2.2.17 or 18 ,
I can't remember which.

Quote:> I an thinking of getting dsl, but the provider uses pppoe - I don't know
> much about it. I intend to use ipmasqing on the box and have a server
> with several boxes behind it. Now linux 2.4 can use pppoe, but does
> windows need to as well or can linux act as a gateway and understand and
> transfer appropriately? I use tcp/ip internally so I was wondering about
> that. Ideas?

The reasons PPPoE was deployed are at best specious.  It was invented
and pushed by one vendor that happens to make the most popular DSL
server machines, and the telcos bought into it.  The one claimed
advantage -- the ability to do accounting -- is also available with
any competent DHCP implementation.  It was run through the IETF PPP
working group and rejected, and became an "Informational"
(non-standards-track) RFC instead.

PPPoE is unnecessary, insecure, and breaks PPP's default MRU.

Actually, the problems run a bit deeper than that.  The DSL line
itself would be most efficiently utilized if it were a straight
synchronous PPP link with a router at each end.  Instead, it's ATM
with Ethernet encapsulated over that, and PPPoE on top, with PPP and
IP on top of that.

Unfortunately, PPPoE is often a fact of life if you have a DSL line.
(There are a few service providers doing DHCP with DSL, but nowhere
near enough.)

--

SUN Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.234W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.497N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
Second Edition now available - http://people.ne.mediaone.net/carlson/ppp

I was refering to the fact that, on the severs we "dial in" to , when there
are no more ip addresses in the pool, the server can kick off the
connection that's been unused for the longest time .

There's also the problem that most isp companies procrastinate when it comes
to system upgrades .

As my mail id shows , I'm with sympatico .
They recently announced some "upgrades" . Well, before they "upgraded" , I
was getting a sustained transfer rate of 100KBytes/s off the tucows server
in Trois-Revieres. Now it's 10 K . Meanwhile on a T1, I get 1.5Mbit off the
same servers .

I didn't know that the pppoe protocol was rejected . So much for common
sense, I suppose . No, don't ask my opinion on the Sympatico
"service" .

So,
ip stuffed into ppp stuffed into ethernet stuffed into atm
.Gobblegobble!There's less stuffing in a turkey!! .

later,
joseph