Slashdot Mirror


Is There a Place for a $500 Ethernet Card?

prostoalex writes "ComputerWorld magazine runs a story on Level 5 Networks, which emerged from the stealth startup status with its own brand of network cards and software called EtherFabric. The company claims they are reducing the load on the servers CPUs and improve the communications between the servers. And it's not vaporware: 'The EtherFabric software shipping Monday runs on the Linux kernel 2.4 and 2.6, with support for Windows and Unix coming in the first half of next year. High volume pricing is $295 for a two-port, 1GB-per-port EtherFabric network interface card and software, while low volume quantities start from $495.'"

10 of 423 comments (clear)

  1. A look into the past by bananahead · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This sounds very similar to the 'smart card' concept back in the late 80's and early 90's. Intel had the 586-driven smart-cards, and I believe 3Com had them as well. They were intended to offload the CPU by putting parts of the stack on the card. They failed because the performance gain and CPU offload numbers were never enough to justify the price difference.

    I wonder what has changed? I have never known the CPU to get dragged down by network traffic, but maybe in the network server markets it is different, However with the Ethernet chipsets being designed into the motherboard and integrated into the tight circle of RAM and CPU, it isn't clear there is a need for this.

    How long before the network control is put into the CPU? It is going to be tough to beat that type of performance.

    --
    A most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a bit.
    1. Re:A look into the past by Phil+Karn · · Score: 4, Insightful
      And how long ago was that? What kind of servers had loads increase by 20% when you dumped the "smart" NICs? How much faster have general purpose CPUs gotten since then? And whose unusually inefficient TCP/IP stack and/or Ethernet driver were you running?

      "Smart" network cards are one of those bad ideas that keep coming back from the grave, because computer science seems to lose its collective memory every decade or so.

      Fifteen years ago, Van Jacobsen did a wonderful presentation at SIGCOMM 1990 on just why they were such a bad idea. The reason is very simple. A modern, well-tuned and optimized TCP/IP stack can process a packet with only about 20 instructions on average. Very few "smart" controller cards have host interfaces that can be spoken to with so few instructions! The switch to and from kernel context will usually cost you more than TCP/IP.

      Not only that, but the coprocessor on the "smart" controller card inevitably ends up being considerably slower than the host CPU, because typical host CPUs are made in much larger quantities, enjoy large economies of scale, and are updated frequently. So you often have the absurd situation of a blazingly fast and modern host CPU twiddling its thumbs waiting for some piss-poor slow CPU on a "smart" controller to execute a protocol handler that could have been done on the host with fewer instructions than it takes just to move a packet to or from the "smart" card.

      And if that weren't enough, rarely do these "smart" network controllers come with open source firmware. Usually the company that makes them obsoletes them quickly (because they don't sell well) and/or goes out of business, and you're left with a very expensive paperweight.

      Since his talk, Ethernet interfaces have totally obsoleted "smart" network cards. They now come with lots of internal buffering to avoid losing packets when interrupt latencies are high, and they take relatively few instructions per byte of user data moved. What more could you want?

    2. Re:A look into the past by klui · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It would depend on the implementation. Not all mobos with built-in ports have "direct access." Some of them go through a shared bus or worse, the PCI bus.

      Intel's implementation for the 865P/875P chipset goes through the memory hub directly http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/schematics/25 281202.pdf while the i845 chipset has the ethernet interface connected to the ICH4 controller hub that is shared among other devices like the PCI bus http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/2519 2401.pdf. VIA's PT894/PT880 ethernet connection goes through a "VIA Connectivity" bus much like the Intel 845 http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/p4-seri es/pt894pro and http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/p4-seri es/pt880. There were some value motherboards that although I recall that they use good/decent chipsets, their designers decided to connect the built-in gigabit ethernet ports off the PCI bus. I cannot recall what these were but I read about them in anandtech several years ago.

  2. Sure there's a place for them by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is There a Place for a $500 Ethernet Card?

    Of course there is, assuming the card performs as advertised. Sheer conjecture: the card likely has a lot of the smarts onboard. Maybe it has some of the TCP and IP stuff on board too (checksum, etc). Compare that to a crapbox $10.95 RealTek[a] card which generates interrupts like mad because it has no smarts and you'd probably be very suprised. (Think of comparing a decent hardware modem to a software based WinModem.)

    [a] I had a sales-drone at Computer Boulevard here in Winnipeg just RAVE about RealTek cards. I said I really wanted 3 Intel or 3COM cards for a new work proxy server and he said 'Why? RealTeks are way cheaper and run at the same speed!' Retard.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  3. Knock-Offs by randomErr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I give Realtek 6 months tops to make thier own knock-off of the card for $24.95.

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
  4. I think there is definately a market for this... by Famanoran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But not necessarily where the vendors think it is.

    Back when I was working at a startup developing anti-DDoS technology, one of the biggest problems we were faced when implemented GigE, was the load on the PCI bus. (This was before we started using PCI-X).

    It depends on exactly how customisable the network card software is, but if you could plonk a couple of those into whatever system you wanted - and if the cards themselves could do, say, signature detection of various flood types, or basic analysis of traffic trends then that is a very definite market.

    I realise the core issue is not addressed (if your physical pipe is full, then you're fucked), but it takes the load of dropping the malicious packets off the host CPU so it can attempt to service whatever valid traffic actually gets through.

    And then there is IP fragmentation. Bad fragments? Perhaps a dodgy fragmentation implementation in the stack? (you know which OS I mean) Lets just drop that before the host sees it and crashes.

    I don't know, I can't find any real information describing what they do, but I can certainly see uses for this.

  5. Re:What good is such a fast Ethernet card... by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    if your internet connection is anything less than fiber, which is about 99.9% of all connections? Not to mention the fact that not many computers can actually handle that much data at once anyway

    Listen, when I've got 30 web servers banging away on a single database server, I want each web server in and out as quickly as possible. Every bit of the handshake, query, and results is going to wrap up that much faster if things are faster, period. When you're dealing with a huge data-driven e-commerce site, where every page renders around a hundred or more queries, and there are dozens or hundreds of concurrent page views, this stuff really counts in the aggregate.

    If you sell one more widget per day, all year long, because your web presentation layer is just a little more snappy, that's sure as hell going to pay for a $500 NIC.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  6. A rose by any other name... by Ingolfke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The name Level 5 refers to the network protocol stack where level 5 delivers data from the network to the application, according to Karr. The company isn't concerned about any potential confusion with Internet Protocol telecom Level 3 Communications Inc. On the contrary, he quipped, "It's working in our favor. People say, 'Yes, we've heard of you. You're a big company.'"

    As lawyers at Level 3 begin salivating at thought of all of the potential lawsuits.

  7. There is a place in an NFS environment by crusty_architect · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We use Filers for storage at Gigabit speeds. Compared to our SAN/FC evironments, we see much higher CPU utilisation on our Sol 8 boxes, especially when attempting to get to Gigibit speeds.

  8. Re:What good is such a fast Ethernet card... by njcoder · · Score: 4, Insightful
    " When you're dealing with a huge data-driven e-commerce site, where every page renders around a hundred or more queries, "

    Each page renders a hundred or more queries? Sounds like you're better off investing in a better design than better hardware.