Re: [Pppext] [Int-area] PPP-to-ethernet

[James Carlson <james.d.carlson at sun.com>]

Derick Winkworth writes:
> I coupled the router-discovery piece with this idea because I imagined we would limit the traffic to router-to-router traffic, and not allow hosts on the ethernet segment to talk directly to the remote PPP device.  So we could abandon that altogether and allow any host to talk to the remote PPP device directly, especially if we use the LSB in the address field in an HDLC-like way to allow for 8 or 16 bit address field length.
> 
> And I guess if we go a step further, we could also effectively create mappings for any PPP link associated with the ethernet segment, so we would also effectively bridge two or more PPP links this way.

If I understand the proposal correctly (and it's not at all clear to
me that I do), it sounds like you're proposing yet another way to
tunnel PPP over other media -- in this case, specifically Ethernet,
but perhaps extensible to other media.

But why do we need another way to do this?  Is the standards-track
L2TP effort not sufficient for the task?

More information about the usage case (why would forwarding PPP
traffic itself make sense here rather than terminating the connection
and routing normally?) and the chosen solution (why invent a new
mechanism rather than using and perhaps extending existing ones?) is
needed in order to move forward.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
_______________________________________________
Pppext mailing list
Pppext at ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext