about IPv6 PPPoE

[Jørgen Hovland]

>You can actually have many PPPoE
> servers on the same network segment, that are differentiated by their
> AccessConcentrator-Name.

And as long as the session-numbers in use are unique.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bo Byrd" <bo@bbyrd.net>
To: <6bone@ISI.EDU>
Cc: <users@ipv6.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 2:13 PM
Subject: RE: about IPv6 PPPoE


> No, PPPoE doesn't ARP.  There is no layer3 field in the packet.  How it
> works is that a client will send out a PPPoE PADI packet which is a
> broadcast.  (PADI is PPPoE Active Discovery Initiation)  A PPPoE server
> (Access Concentrator) will see this broadcast and send a PADO - PPPoE
> active Discovery Offer packet to the MAC address requesting the PADI.
> The session then continues on.  That's how the 2 ends discover mac
> addresses.  If you sniff a PPPoE session with Ethereal you can see
> exactly what I'm talking about.  You can actually have many PPPoE
> servers on the same network segment, that are differentiated by their
> AccessConcentrator-Name.  You can manually place the name of a specific
> AccessConcentrator in the PADI packet if you know the particular name of
> the one you want to connect to, and your PPPoE client software supports
> you doing this.  This is never required and rarely do you see more than
> 1 AccessConcentrator per lan segment anyways.
>
> I'd say PPPoE would not need to be modified to work with IPv6 by my
> understanding of how PPPoE works but I could be wrong.
>
>
> -Bo
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On Behalf Of
> yjchu
> Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 4:26 AM
> To: Jørgen Hovland; 6bone@ISI.EDU
> Subject: Re: about IPv6 PPPoE
>
>
>
> Hi:
>                I am curious about what you have tried. Can you tell me
> where can I download PPPoE software to try the dial up? Do you really
> try PPPoE or just PPP (not PPPoE) over p2p link?
>
> I am confusing .........As I know, PPPoE must perform ARP and thus,
> there is a field to carry IPv4 address in PPPoE protocol. Why does
> PPPoE(v4) not need to be modified to support IPv6 ?  IPv6 uses neighbor
> discovery to find MAC <--> IPv6 address map. The protocol is over IP,
> not like ARP(v4). Is that the reason why PPPoE need not to be modified
> for IPv6 ?
>
> Thanks
> Yann-Ju CHu
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jørgen Hovland" <jorgen@hovland.cx>
> To: "yjchu" <yjchui@cht.com.tw>; <itojun@iijlab.net>
> Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 5:05 PM
> Subject: Re: about IPv6 PPPoE
>
>
> > Are you sure about that?  We are using PPPoE with ipv6 and its working
> fine (IPCP6 or something).
> >
> > Joergen Hovland
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <itojun@iijlab.net>
> > To: "yjchu" <yjchui@cht.com.tw>
> > Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 6:32 AM
> > Subject: Re: about IPv6 PPPoE
> >
> >
> > > >Hi:
> > > >    At present, there is no specification for PPPoE (IPv6).
> > > >However, = What we will do in the future if we want to dial to IPv6
>
> > > >network
> through =
> > > >ADSL? Or, we will use fixed rather than dial-up connection in the
> future =
> > > >IPv6 ADSL access?
> >
> > > fixed, permanent connectivity with static address is preferred than
> > > dialups, however:
> > > - there are cases where dialup is really necessary - like travelling
> > >   notebooks.
> > > - there are needs for automating customer device configuration.
> > >
> > > so, a protocol for assigning prefix to customer would be nice. the
> > > topic is under discussion at IETF ipngwg.
> > >
> > > you may want to check the following:
> > > overview:
> > > draft-itojun-ipv6-dialup-requirement-02.txt
> > > protocol proposals: draft-troan-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-00.txt
> > > (there are other proposals exist)
> > > IETF ipngwg minutes for last meeting (www.ietf.org)
> > >
> > > itojun
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>