Active-E and GPON AN's support split horizons where shared VLAN's allow for simple service delivery to the CPE, but do not permit inter-customer communications at Layer 2.
Yes.
All communications happens upstream at the BNG, which works for IPv4 and IPv6. And no, Proxy ARP is recommended for my competitors. If you're not my competitor, suggest you turn it off if you want happiness.
So, as I wrote to Mikael, don't you need to use proxy-ARP or proxy-ND to get devices in same L2 domain to be able to communicate? They are on same subnet so they will ARP/ND for each other.
The system specs. are impressive - basically, a little BNG in a switch, which I can't complain with.
There is no rocket science here. Scripting in routers/switches seems to be more common, Cisco has TCL and some Nexus and Arista boxes do Python. There is only some hooks into the control/forwarding plane needed to do advanced services in access. Forwarding plane is covered mostly by SDN so half the work is done. In a 24/48 port access switch there are few clients, so scripting performance is not a problem.
But, if I'm a business with a low start-up budget focused on broadband services, or lots of cash with no plans to break into the enterprise or service provider markets, the PacketFront make sense. My only concern would be NG-MVPN support - does the PacketFront have that?
They working on all the MPLS stuff to be able to sell L2 and L3 VPN services.
Well: - I support DHCP instead of PPPoE for subscriber management. - I support decentralized rather than centralized BNG's. - I support Active-E rather than GPON.
These are all relatively less-than-popular scenarios based on many of the deployments I've seen in previous years.
Agree, the above list is music in my ears :) /Anders