Subject: RE: Extending IPCP for Route Table Entries

From: Doug Kehn <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 09:24:29 -0500

>From: Vernon Schryver

>How does one PPP peer of the customer premise equipment know anything
>about the IP address and netmaks of any other PPP peer of the CPE?
>How does one PPP peer even know there is a second PPP peer?

1. [DSL specific] Each PPP link could be transported across a separate ATM
PVC.  The ATM PVCs could be switched, in the Access Providers network, to
separate PPP termination points.  The CPE would be configured to bring up
each PPP link.  Once each PPP link was established, the CPE's routing table
would contain a host route entry to the remote peer for each PPP interface.
At this point the CPE has mutlitple PPP interfaces which packets can be
routed.  The remote peers don't necessarily know or care about all the
remote peers that the CPE is attached.

2. [PPPoE specific]  The CPE could request a unique Access
Concentrator/Service for each PPP link.  Each Access Concentrator/Service
combination could be linked (i.e. L2TP) to separate PPP termination points.
The CPE would be configured to bring up each PPPoE link.  Once each PPPoE
link was established, the CPE's routing table would contain a host route
entry to the remote peer for each PPPoE interface.  At this point the CPE
has mutlitple PPPoE interfaces which packets can be routed.  The remote
peers don't necessarily know or care about all the remote peers that the CPE
is attached.

---

From: Vernon Schryver <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:39:11 -0600 (MDT)

> From: Doug Kehn <[email-masked]>

> peers don't necessarily know or care about all the remote peers that the CPE

Isn't that exactly the way things work today without the proposed
IPCP extension?

How is the proposal used in either the DSL or PPPoE case?  
In either case, doesn't one set of PPP state machines need to know
about each other so that one of them can include the proposed
extra IPCP option?

How is the PPP state machine that should include the proposed extra
IPCP option chosen?  What distinguishes that PPP link from the others?

I clearly don't understand the scenarios in which the proposed IPCP
option would be used.  I thought it had something to do with 3G
radio-telephones.  Could you repeat the description of the game (?)
scenario with different words?

Vernon Schryver    [email-masked]