IP over Firewire Updated

foniksonik writes "Apple released an update to its IP over FireWire software. 'Now the IP over FireWire Preview Release adds support for using the Internet Protocol - commonly known as TCP/IP - over FireWire. ... Using the existing Network Preferences Pane, users can add FireWire as their IP network node to connect and communicate between two machines. ... In all cases, Rendezvous can be used if desired for configuration, name resolution, and discovery.'" Now it is time for YA debate on FireWire vs. Ethernet. Let the festivities commence!

Comments

some info.

[sirfunk]

this page, has plenty of info on tcp/ip over firewire.. w/ a quick read looks like length is the biggest problem, 2nd to no implimentation supporting more then 2 devices.

Gigabit ethernet versus firewire

[goombah99]

So how is this better than gigabit ethernet which is standard on most macs?
Is it just another way of communicating that perhaps allows one to avoid a congested/insecure ethernet backbone when connecting two neigboring macs?
what's the big deal?

Re:Gigabit ethernet versus firewire

[Duck_Taffy]

Gigabit isn't standard on most macs. It's standard on most pro model macs - the towers, and the 15" and 17" PowerBooks. Not available on the iMacs, eMacs, iBooks, or 12" PowerBook. Those are only available in the 10/100 variety of ethernet. Besides which, the first models of 15" PowerBook G4 came in 10/100 only, as well as the first two generations of G4 towers. So yeah, lots of computers currently in use that don't have Gigabit.

The other advantage is that FireWire hubs are much cheaper than Gigabit Ethernet switches.

Re:Gigabit ethernet versus firewire

[Gropo]

OS X features Multilink Multihoming, which allows multiple concurrent interfaces to IP ports. Conceivably, if you wished to cluster two Macs you could use 1394b, 802.11g and 1000BaseT (and even the 56k modems, I guess) simultaneously to pass packets to the client machine, thereby alleviating your bandwidth bottleneck by a huge margin.

I wouldn't say "better," I'd say "extends the functionailty of the machine"

Re:Gigabit ethernet versus firewire

[SensitiveMale]

Have you prices gigabit ethernet switches lately?

Have you priced firewire hubs?

Big difference.

Re:Gigabit ethernet versus firewire

[dbirchall]

FireWire 400 is obviously slower than Gigabit Ethernet. As is FireWire 800. But the second-generation FireWire spec defines speeds up to 3200Mbps (3.2Gbps) over appropriate cables (fiber, I believe) and distances (short).

It remains to be seen whether FireWire will hit 3.2GBps before 10GBps Ethernet becomes affordable. (Even if it does, I'd really expect people to use it more for SANs and NAS than for ordinary networks.)

Re:Gigabit ethernet versus firewire

[tupps]

Just for those who are wondering:

Netgear 4 port 10/100/1000 Switch $725 (aussie dollars)

Belkin 4 port Firewire Hub -- $149 (again AUD)

So 4~5 times the price difference

Re:Gigabit ethernet versus firewire

[Alan Partridge]

Not true. In practice (yes, we have a Gig E network) you RARELY get over 300Mbps from a Gig E link - FW 400 can hit these rates just fine.

old hat

[g4dget]

The eth1394 driver has been in the Linux kernel for a while. You can find a discussion of using IEEE 1394 for compute clusters here. And, you can do the same with both USB 1 and USB 2.

Generally, Gigabit Ethernet is more flexible, easier to maintain, and has more third party hardware available for it, but if you have a motherboard with FW and are setting up a special-purpose, low-cost cluster, IEEE1394 or USB2 networking may be a reasonable choice.

Useful when Ethernet is "in use"

[macmastery]

IP over FireWire is most useful when the Ethernet port is in use (such as, on a server). Let's say you have a full-time web server, serving over its ethernet interface. Say you need to upload more content, but you can't take that ethernet port or that server offline. You can upload the content and let the ethernet continue to serve as much as it can. It's handy and you don't need a complex networking solution.

Also, consumer machines can have faster file transfers without shutting one machine down into target disk mode. I think it's supposed to be simple and fast, not scalable and fastEST.

Let's hope this is standard in Panther

[MalleusEBHC]

I'm hoping that they slide IP over FireWire in as a standard feature on Panther. I've been using it since January, and I must say that it is excellent. The speed isn't quite there yet, but it is good enough. By this, I mean that target disk mode still gives noticeably faster transfers, but this feels faster than 100mbps ethernet. (I haven't run numbers, sue me.)

For the people out there questioning "Why?", here goes. For machines with built in ethernet and no PCI slots, this is a godsend. I have my Cube and my TiBook on a little LAN using IP over FireWire and Internet Sharing. Since the Cube's ethernet port is dedicated to the network connection, the only other way I would have been able to do this would be AirPort, and this obviously blows that away for bandwidth. With AirPort, large file transfers would take forever, and I probably couldn't max out my connection. (Gotta love college hookups!)

This is just one of the many reasons why I love Apple so much. For all the things in OS X that get big press, there are so many little treasures such as IP over FireWire. Even for a preview release, it's pretty damn well polished. (Disclaimer: Many have complained that is has trashed prefs on install, but in two installs and two upgrades I've never had this problem.) Keep up the good work Apple, and make this a part of the standard install ASAP.

IPoFW

[dr00g911]

IP Over Firewire has been really useful for me in a couple of situations -- most notably when I've needed to run backups of my main Macs. For day-to-day use, I stick to 10/100 though -- it's cheaper to implement, and I can crimp my own cables on a whim.

I've got a Shuttle barebones based Wintel system with built-in firewire and a pair of massive drives that I use for a rendering station/backup server -- and let me tell you -- backing up 130 gigs worth of DV footage/uncompressed TIFFs (insert pr0n joke here) over Firewire is one hell of a lot quicker than waiting for the same over 100mbps Ethernet. XP is slightly flaky when it comes to IP over firewire (no, i *don't* want those connections bridged!) but once you get it running it's a little more stable than your average house of cards.

I know a lot of photographers who swear by Target Disk mode as well -- they carry their powerbooks as preview stations and Big Honkin Memory Cards (using Firewire-connected pro cameras) and once they get back to their main machine to retouch, they just go into target mode and stuff dumps *fast*. Now if only I could get a kodak camera back to interface with my iPod......

All things being equal, I've been tempted to convert everything I've got over to firewire from the stock ethernet jacks -- but I honestly have better uses for a firewire port most of the time (DVD-R, DVcam, DVDeck, DV-to-component box, iPod), and I really prefer to rely on my router for connection sharing instead of the Mac.