Slashdot Mirror
10-Gigabit Ethernet Standard Approved
A little birdie brings news that that 802.3ae standard for 10 Gigabit/second Ethernet has been approved. Everyone out there with Gigabit Ethernet - you are now officially obsolete. The new standard is fiber only, no more of that nasty copper stuff.
Here's one that might be a little more informative. I leave the google link to someone else.
I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!
- Large server with many, many disk controllers and even more disks
- Network backbones
It'll creep in to the second quickly enough (once Cisco et al support it in hardware), I'd imagine (we already have a 4gbps backbone using 4 gigabit lines in our site) and the former will start happening at the top-end installations of E15K's and the like.1 LoC (Library of Congress) = 10 Terabytes = 10,000 Gigabytes
That's 0.000125LoC/sec, or roughly 2.22 hours to transfer the entire contents across 10GigE.
Wow.
*looks at his 14.4k modem*
*looks at the article*
*looks at his modem*
*cries*
It should be obvious that to burry copper is completely obsolete. Per yard, fiber should be cheaper to manufacture and bury.
10Gb speeds should be enough for anybody, so start building the infrastructure now and leave the telcos in the dust.
Will they do it? No. Why not? Because they think that they should bury the copper/fiber hybrid cable that they have been burying and come back and do it again later.
Burying cable is the most expensive part of telecomm.... retards.
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
IIRC the original Gig-E hardware (if not the original spec) was Fiber only as well. Eventually people started coming out with copper hardware to save on costs. In most cases, the only real advantages to fiber are the long cable runs and the immunity to interference in noisy EM environments (like your typical computer room). The downside is the cost.
I read the internet for the articles.
Lynx will rock!!!
I'm guessing 10GbitE will be used for inter-switch and inter-router connections long before it gets to the desktop. Ever looked at performance comparisions between 100BT and 1000BT between just two PCs? A couple years ago the difference wasn't much... NICs weren't efficent enough and the host PC's didn't have enough CPU power to handle that many tiny packets per second. Jumboframes and faster CPUs have helped a lot since then, but we're still a long ways away from even 90% utilization between two PCs with 1000BT. And here we are with 10GigE, with 10x as many packets per second.
I'm I the only one that thinks the only efficent 10GigE NICs are going to be PCI-X cards with an onboard 2.6 GHz P4 co-processor and 512 MB of buffer?
We're going to need something to replace PCI before we can use 10Gbit ethernet fully though. Even 64bit 66Mhz PCI has a max (in theory) of 528 Megabytes/sec.
On a side note, I have sucessfully pulled 130Mbytes/sec out of 5400 RPM IDE Disks on 3ware controllers, with a cost less than $9000. 3 controllers, 24 disks, 64 bit 33Mhz PCI. RAID 0 over 5. So the potential is there to exceed current GigE, without too many disks or controllers, or getting too expensive.
It would also help a lot if we could get regular gigabit ethernet working well first. I think there was a story here on Slashdot not long ago that showed that most GigE cards had trouble pushing over 400Mbits even with large frames. Only the expensive $500 one came close to it's full potential (900Mbits). My experience is that without jumbo frames, there is hardly any advantage with lower end GigE cards.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
10Gigabit still woun't standand up to the slashdot effect
Shoot me
revcom
IEEE
Consider yourself hit with clue-stick.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Switches for these speeds are still kind of large, awkward and pricy. We had a visiting lecturer from one of the major players in this level of kit talking here about 6 months ago, and their top-end product (he showed a photo) was a 48-way full bandwidth 10Gb switch, It filled two full height 19" racks, consumed 20kW and cost upwards of $2M.
Of course they've probably come down a but in the last few months...
The highest speed PCI-X (64-bit @ 133Mhz) is capable of reaching ~1GByte/sec which is just about the speed of 10 Gig Ethernet. There was/is the promise of Araphoe (sp?) that resembles AMD's HyperTransport but would be used for expansion cards rather than a chip-to-chip pathway.
The other bottleneck with even high-end Intel-based servers could easily choke when dealing with not only 10 Gig Ethernet but also add Fiber Channel, multiple channels of Ultra 160 or Ultra 320 SCSI RAID, etc., since the memory bandwidth (and processor bus speed?) would then become the possibly the next bottleneck. RISC servers don't have that much of a problem just yet, but sooner or later it will be.
The reason is material properties.
Six months ago, I had the chance to talk with the 3Com technical manager who was on the board drafting the spec.
What he said was very simple; all tests indicated that the only way to have 10Gb over copper is to limit the connection distance to centimeters!
1Gb already pushed the envelope for copper, using all pairs, multiplexing, and error correction; 10Gb is just not possible.
Every time they come out with a new standard for ethernet it's the same old schpiel - "you need this special expensive coax/shielded-pair/fiber-optic etherhose to make it work; you canna change the laws o' physics Cap'n!"
Then eight months later somebody figures out how to run it on old lamp cords and string.
Don't rush out to buy fiber unless you need the noise isolation (glass is great for that!) and don't care about the cost.
Please put down the CCNA study guide and back away slowly. Ever since the invention of switches most people haven't had to worry about collisions. We're talking about full duplex, 2 hosts on a collision domain. In other words no collisions. If you are getting collisions on GigE or switched FastE you are doing something very wrong.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
Now my PC133 RAM is *really* obsolete. It can't even handle an ethernet connection!
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I know you say this jokingly.. or do you?
This is not THE new standard, it is A new standard.
It is THE standard for 10Gbps ethernet. Nothing more.
Gigabit is hardly obsolete when a) very few corporate networks are using Gigabit outside the server room, and...
Your average workstation can probably not even push 10Gbps, or anywhere near it in the first place. (Of course, that's not as big a deal, because it's ethernet, right? A single host can't max it out anyway.. the higher capacity means more hosts with lower latency.)
Okay, now PCI is a bottleneck. Even 64bit PCI, quad-pumped, would still only support around 8Gb/sec... So I suggest that we repurpose the AGP port. We can go back to boring old PCI for the graphics card, so lets implement AGP network cards! Of course, it won't be the "Accelerated Graphics Port" anymore, it will be the... "Always Generous Pornography" "Accelerated Game Piracy" "Automatic Grits-to-Pants"
Does anyone know how big packets one can send thru such a pipe ?
100MBit maintained the same MTU as 10MBit, 1GBit maintained the same MTU too - leading to severe problems with performance. It's bad enough on 100Mbit, it's horrible on 1Gbit, to think that they maintained the 1500 byte limit on 10Gbit gives me the shakes...
Yes, I know about "jumbo frames", and I challenge you to find an affordable 1Gbit switch that actually supports it.
Anything below 64KByte packets would be insane as I see it.
Anyone knows ?
I can strip copper wire with my teeth, and terminate it with a Leatherman tool. Until I can do that with fiber, my network's sticking to good old-fashioned electrons.