[Bridged Ethernet] + [PPPoE] = [PPPoA] ?

[root.veg]

I'm trying to get something sorted out in my head before I go ahead and buy an ADSL connection. I already have a modem, which can use one of four different connection types:

PPP over Ethernet
PPP over ATM
IP over ATM
Bridged Ethernet over ATM (RFC1483)

The ISP I want to use (Eclipse, in the UK) has told me they use PPP over ATM. However, if I configure my modem to use PPPoA, it will use its own client software, and force me to connect my Linux boxes using DHCP and Class C private IP addresses. What I really want is to use one of my linux boxes as the router and for the modem itself to be transparent (ie not to have its own IP address). Judging from the instruction manual, Bridged Ethernet over ATM is the way you do this. I'm comfortable with NAT-ing and firewalling, I just want to get it so my linux routing box has one interface with a public IP connected to the internet.

Two questions, then:

1) If my modem uses a Bridged Ethernet over ATM connection, an then I use PPP over Ethernet on my linux routing box, is that the same as using PPP over ATM?

2) If I'm right with question 1, what software should I use on the linux box to make the PPPoE connection? I'm using Debian.

I *have* done some searching (OK, I admit not reading RFC1483 :) ) but what I'm really lacking is the general idea. Searching is only easy when you know what you're looking for...

[root.veg]

Looks like I've found the answer to question 2. This (http://packages.debian.org/stable/net/pppoe.html) is the Debian package for pppoe. If I do indeed have to use pppoe, I guess that's how I'll do it.

Still no luck on question 1 though...

[fredg]

PPP over ethernet (PPPoE) and PPP over ATM (PPPoA) are not the same thing.

If your ISP requires PPPoA, then using PPPoE will not work.

[root.veg]

PPP over ethernet (PPPoE) and PPP over ATM (PPPoA) are not the same thing.

If your ISP requires PPPoA, then using PPPoE will not work.

Yeah, I'm OK with that... but my naive logic says that PPP over Ethernet, with, in turn, Ethernet over ATM sounds OK - see what I mean?

[root.veg]

Some progress, I think, for anyone interested - I mailed Eclipse explaining my problem, and they gave me a helpful reply :eek: pretty quickly. Note this fact, potential UK ADSL subscribers! Note that the "router" they're replying about is my own Linux router box, so no problems there:

Date/Time: 2003-09-16 14:55:35
Description: Reply
Detail: Eclipse use PPPoAtm for any telephone connection regardless of dynamic or static IP addresses.

You should be able to use Bridged Ethernet mode to apply the ip adress to the ethernet card. However depending on the router it may not allow the other network connections to work, suggest you contact the manufacterer to see if a bridged connection allows access to the other ports.

If you set up the router for static IPs one will be applied to the router (gateway) which would leave 5 other free if you asked for a block of 8. This is the recommended method.

Kind Regards,

The Eclipse Customer Services Team


Also I saw this reference (http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/erx/erx50x/swconfig-link/html/bridged-ethernet-config4.html) (don't know quite how relevant) to using [PPPoE] over [Bridged Ethernet over ATM] so it definitely has been done.

[craigad]

root.veg,

how have you got on with this?

The company I worked for has just signed up to this provider as part of an office move. Just wondering how you have got on with having a Linux router. I am using the provided one at the moment and it sucks!

Any pointers would be appreciated.

/craigad