Hardware Update

[dswartz]

Burris, the point is that with DHCP, the ATA requires no special configuration by the VSP, whereas for PPPoE, it may very well need it, which means to have the ATA/router sitting in front of the customer's network will require VOIPO (or whoever) to have to know your PPPoE credentials. Aside from the support hassle, there is also the security aspect - VOIPO is my VSP, not my ISP...

[burris]

Burris, the point is that with DHCP, the ATA requires no special configuration by the VSP, whereas for PPPoE, it may very well need it, which means to have the ATA/router sitting in front of the customer's network will require VOIPO (or whoever) to have to know your PPPoE credentials. Aside from the support hassle, there is also the security aspect - VOIPO is my VSP, not my ISP...

I'm trying to understand what you wrote.

At the moment, with DSL, I have the DSL modem in a bridged mode..feeding my wireless router that performs the PPPoE that is set up in the router, not with the ISP.

When I hook up the 502, I will set up the router to do PPPoE. The 502 router DHCP can be NAT router(so it can go behind a firewall) or switched mode..I'm not keen on using IVR to set it up, and I think direct access will do the job..

I then hope to go into my existing router that will function as an access point.

What is it that you see differently with the 502?

[dswartz]

With PPPoE, the client (your router) has to communicate with (and authenticate with) the ISP's server. Once that works, you have an IP address and can do stuff. If you put an ATA in front of router, then the ATA needs to do the PPPoE authentication with the ISP, since your original router is sitting behind it and can't do PPPoE. Not to mention having to deal with possible double-NAT issues from apps on my internal LAN.

[zevin]

With PPPoE, the client (your router) has to communicate with (and authenticate with) the ISP's server. Once that works, you have an IP address and can do stuff. If you put an ATA in front of router, then the ATA needs to do the PPPoE authentication with the ISP, since your original router is sitting behind it and can't do PPPoE. Not to mention having to deal with possible double-NAT issues from apps on my internal LAN.

You see what I am talking about... I can see "DSL Joe" under his desk unplugging things, using the wrong AC adapter, and trying to remember PPPoE login details like password. Who remembers the DSL password, I don't.

For the average "Joe" something that just plugs in and goes is best. Now if you say the 502 can do that, well I see problems with "Joe" knowing which port on the 502 he should use to plug into the router: wan or lan. Perhaps VOIPo should include an instruction sheet with the adapter or cover the other port with a sticker.

At some point in the setup, if you use PPPoE, you still have to engage it. Why is this more difficult?

Yes you and I know how to go in and set up PPPoE on the 502. However "Joe" is going to get lost real fast. I was not talking about it being difficult for us. You have to consider on occasions the cable or DSL provider installs the modem, connection and even sets up the computers for the user. Granted custom installs is not as common, but still exists. That user has no idea what was done.

Now the user who's modem doesn't require another device to do authentication should have no problem placing the 502 between the modem and router.

Food for thought.