Re: I-D: Simple Configured Tunnel Setup Procedure

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> > My feeling on this is that most of the ISPs will not accept off-band
> > procedures, and TSP seems useful to avoid that.
> 
> In my opinion if ISP wants to provide tunnel service they have to know in
> advance that they will serve something - at least, in order to be able to
> track the usage of service. If ISP is using RADIUS or Diameter
> authentication for obtaining the customers' tunnel endpoint
> addresses, they already had to have some form of agreement. It would be
> very easy for the customer just ask IPv6 tunnel service via the
> customer care center of ISP. Probably I would use this method to provide
> IPv6 for DSL/dial-up or otherwise authenticated users.

Right.. my feeling is, from the ISP point-of-view, that either they 
want to have a simple mechanism with little machinery, or they want to 
have a system that is also future-proof for the time they'll enable v6 
on the access link (e.g., a connection to the databases somehow, a 
system which requires only a small amount of changes, if any).

The one thing I am *not* aware of is, how many of the ISPs have this
L2TP + PPP stuff set up already.  AFAIK, L2TP is basically needed for
xDSL aggregation unless you do it with ATM (that's how many do it
around here, at least).

I could see why an ISP would not want certain "hackish" 
characteristics of a solution, like proposed in STEP in the "adhoc" 
mode.  I'm not even sure how many ISPs would be interested of the 
"adhoc" mode (i.e, no user registration for v6), but it seems that it 
seems desirable at least for certain types of 3GPP operators.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings