Re: [PLUG] "evils of PPPOE"

[Michael Leone <turgon@mike-leone.com>]

On Mon, 2002-03-25 at 16:05, Jon Galt wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, gabriel rosenkoetter wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 01:30:19PM -0500, Jon Galt wrote:
> > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 pinkee@cavegirl.org wrote:
> > > > In this case I think pppoe is a useful tool. but, forcing
> > > > login's in some other manner must be possible without the limitations of
> > > > pppoe.
> > > What limitations are you referring to?
> > 
> > Rather than chattering implications back and forth, why don't we all
> > just go read the documentation about this?
> > 
> > http://www.redback.com/en-US/whitepp/pdf/wp_pppoe_comparison.pdf
> 
> Thanks Gabriel, that is an interesting article.  I don't see anything
> about limitations of PPPoE in it.
> 
> My objection to PPPoE is very minor.  It just seems strange to me that I
> have to "log in" to a so-called "always on" connection. 

Which, to many, is a limitation, since they want an "always on"
connection.

> And with a static IP, at that!  

Another limitation, to some.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part