Slashdot Mirror
Gigabit Networking for the Home?
The Clockwork Troll asks: "I've had a whole-house audio/video distribution project on the back-burner for a while now. As gigabit networking hardware prices come down to earth, I'm tempted to jump on the 1000BaseTX bandwagon. As far as I can tell though, the current crop of consumer-priced hardware/software doesn't address a couple key issues, namely: fragmenting jumbo frames for the benefit of legacy clients - this is critical as some of the devices on my network will not tolerate the 9000+ byte Ethernet frames which are needed to get the most out of gigabit; and OS support - do Linux and Windows require much tweaking to take advantage of gigabit? Will most drivers automatically optimize themselves? A Google search didn't reveal too much consensus, especially on hardware choices. What switches and software configurations have Slashdot readers been using for home gigabit networks, in particular mixed ones (100/1000BaseTX?"
It's your money, but I will leave you with the single most important axiom of computer networking:
- You do not eliminate bottlenecks- you can only move them around.
Your networking hardware, software, and applications are all designed to tolerate bandwidth problems. They were built to be the bottleneck. Can you say the same of your hard drive or PCI bus? Trying to deal with networking by hurling poorly thought out solutions at it can and does very often yeild the opposite result.who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
I stream at 11 Mb/s you insensitive clod!!!
That is not right. Any new disk is capable of delivering about four times the speed of 100 Mbit/s Ethernet. When transferring large files, you would also really achieve that. My Macs all have GigE built-in, and files fly at up to about 30-40 MB/s between them. Four times the speed (one fourth the waiting) is no laughing matter. Another tip: Don't forget that IP over FireWire (which you might already have in your computers) might help you out, in some fortunate circumstances. 400 Mbit/s is quite alright.
Actually, your math sucks. Let me break this down for you.
4*900 = 900 + 900 + 900 + 900
900+900+900+900 = 1800+1800 = 3600
3600 != 3800
Therefore you are a retard who can't even do basic math
If you can read this then I forgot to check "Post Anonymously"
The concept of a bottleneck is not that without it you have unlimited speed. The concept is a single point that is significantly slower than the rest of the system and therefore the limiting factor for speed.
I'm starting to realize, as I see slashdot discussions unfold about topics I am personally expert it, that this place is overrun with people who do not have a fucking clue.
Your hard drive, IO bus, etc. are not bit pumps that operate in constant linear transfer mode. I know you seem to think that what you read on the back of the box in Best Buy is *Reality*, but I've been working in networking for years now, and I have seen situations where adding bandwidth or prioritizing certain traffic in QoS actually had a reverse effect on the performance of the overall system, a phenomenon which your extensive experience with... ahem... Netgear, would be unable to explain.
If you want to spend your money on equipment that "goes up to 11", that is your business. If you actually want improved network performance, then STFU and listen when someone comes along who actually knows their shit.
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
I probably shouldn't go into corperate networking strategy since it sounds like yours is a mess but in my experience a good fast flat network is always more reliable than one with lots of layer 3 rules and messy topologies.
You're either trolling, and throwing me a very big bone, or you've just demonstrated the level of ignorance of networking technology that would roughly translate to the Earth being the back of a turtle in terms of geography. Either way, I'll just back away slowly.
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.