FTTC Ordered. Is using Linux's PPPoE ok?

[alexwright]

I've just bitten the bullet and ordered FTTC. The speed checker reckons on 28MBit

Rather than buy a PPPoE router, I should be able to use my existing Linux server, shouldn't I? Its already doing all the routing for the house anyway (+web server +email).

I'd rather not shell out on a unnecessary box if I don't need to!
Has anyone else tried this?

[Steve]

Not sure it's been tried here by that method but certainly using a Windows PC direct ethernet cable from NIC to VDSL Modem via PPPOE has worked.

[kev445]

Yes Linux PPPOE will work.

Netgear routers are based on Linux, which uses the exact same PPPOE client.

[alexwright]

Yes Linux PPPOE will work.

Netgear routers are based on Linux, which uses the exact same PPPOE client.

Great!
Can you recommend any settings?

[kev445]

Sorry for the late reply...

Unfortunately I don't, it has been a while since I have done any PPPOE.

[esh]

I use pfSense/monowall in a VM that does all the PPPoE configuration just fine with a nice web interface complete with all the port forwarding and firewall and traffic shaping madness. You might want to look into that for a neat solution.

[alexwright]

That's a good idea! I'll take a look at those.

I hope the order comes through quickly. My ADSL is really playing up tonight. 

[esh]

If you're a purist who wants ipv6 you'll probably want m0n0wall. If you prefer a (slightly) slicker interface and lots of plugins (such as snort and ntop) you will probably want pfSense. If you need a hand with either give a shout, but they seem to be quite happy on VMWare Server.

[Holodene]

I'm considering getting one of these http://linitx.com/viewproduct.php?prodid=12647

I reckon it should be able to handle 40Mb/s of WAN throughput.

What do you think?

[pctech]

Looks like a decent bit of kit.

[Steve]

Perhaps someone else will chime in but is the absence of gigabyte NICs a worry.

[pctech]

Hmmm you've got a point Steve.

[Steve]

It's just that we've seen a Netgear 10/100 router struggle to give optimum throughput on FTTC.

[Holodene]

Perhaps someone else will chime in but is the absence of gigabyte NICs a worry.

It will be used with a gigabit switch.

[esh]

Netgear products are just dodgy. There is no reason a 10/100 switch should give bad throughput for FTTC unless there is a ton of local traffic (or it's buggered). Or it's in 10M mode I suppose

Yes I would recommend that unit... not used that exact one myself, but a good Linux solution will do you well. Not a bad price either.

[Lance]

Netgear products are just dodgy. There is no reason a 10/100 switch should give bad throughput for FTTC unless there is a ton of local traffic (or it's buggered). Or it's in 10M mode I suppose

I agree, and it goes to show that they are made to a price.

[alexwright]

BT Engineer came round  Unannounced, of course! 




Yeah!

Using Linux pppoe was very easy.

I simply ran pppoe-setup followed by pppoe-start

Note: The ethernet port you use to connect to the VDSL modem does not end up with its own IP address! This had me confused for a while. 

[Rik]

Thanks for that. Now go away and stop making me jealous. 

[pctech]

I gather you'll be happy to pay a high price for fibre when it arrives Rik?

[Rik]

Yes and no, Mitch. Part of me, which will probably win, wants to try fibre. The other part of me says that if I only use 6GB/month, what's the point?

[Simon]

Well, you'll use it quicker. 

[Rik]

 

I can't type any faster though. 

[Simon]

You type fast enough! 

[Glenn]

Part of me says I only use 15gb/month, the other part says buy it now. I could then host races on my connection, using the faster upload speed. 

[Rik]

You type fast enough! 

Ah, but legibly?

[Rik]

Part of me says I only use 15gb/month, the other part says buy it now. I could then host races on my connection, using the faster upload speed. 

That's the trouble, isn't it, Glenn. We feel we could do more if we had it...

[Glenn]

I did host races on my ADSL, but my long line is not stable enough, the drivers were complaining of wild pings.

That's the trouble, isn't it, Glenn. We feel we could do more if we had it...

[Rik]

I did host races on my ADSL, but my long line is not stable enough, the drivers were complaining of wild pings.

Are you sure that wasn't wild pigs?

[Glenn]

It's just as well it was a driving game, the minimum pings were in the high 80's, peaking over 500 at times when someone forgot to turn of Outlook 

[Rik]

Oops.

[esh]

Using Linux pppoe was very easy.

I simply ran pppoe-setup followed by pppoe-start

Note: The ethernet port you use to connect to the VDSL modem does not end up with its own IP address! This had me confused for a while. 

Glad it's working. Also, yes... since PPPoE isn't an IP protocol you won't get an IP address with it Literally it is "point to point", hence addresses should be redundant info.

[Rik]

Being totally ignorant in this area, how do you then connect it to a network, esh?

[esh]

You have to route it, or bridge it (eth0->ppp0). The server has two (or more) network ports, one on TCP/IP to your LAN, and the PPPoE port to the DSL modem. This is fairly trivial to do in Linux. PPPoE, being ethernet packets, does contain the target MAC address in the packet header to ensure its destination. But obviously this cannot go past more than one hop (gateway) because MAC information is no longer kept beyond that (hence point to point). I believe PPPoE can support multiple clients connecting to a host, but in this case it would be nonsense as each one would try and take hold of the DSL connection and cause madness.

[Rik]

Thanks, esh.