From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp81.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (smtp81.iad3a.emailsrvr.com [173.203.187.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 802C83B29D for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:29:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from app68.wa-webapps.iad3a (relay-webapps.rsapps.net [172.27.255.140]) by smtp3.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 0742A249F7; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:29:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from deepplum.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by app68.wa-webapps.iad3a (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5273E0129; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:29:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by apps.rackspace.com (Authenticated sender: dpreed@deepplum.com, from: dpreed@deepplum.com) with HTTP; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:29:25 -0500 (EST) X-Auth-ID: dpreed@deepplum.com Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:29:25 -0500 (EST) From: "David P. Reed" To: "=?utf-8?Q?Joel_Wir=C4=81mu_Pauling?=" Cc: "Dave Taht" , "cerowrt-devel" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_20211216162925000000_87288" Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Type: html In-Reply-To: References: <1639678615.275317887@apps.rackspace.com> X-Client-IP: 209.6.168.128 Message-ID: <1639690165.936410589@apps.rackspace.com> X-Mailer: webmail/19.0.13-RC X-Classification-ID: dec34d42-9963-45d7-877c-9db22ab1d180-1-1 Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] 10gige and 2.5gige X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 21:29:26 -0000 ------=_20211216162925000000_87288 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0AThanks, That's good to know...The whole SFP+ adapter concept has seemed = to me to be a "tweener" in hardware design space. Too many failure points. = That said, I like fiber's properties as a medium for distances.=0A =0A =0AO= n Thursday, December 16, 2021 2:31pm, "Joel Wir=C4=81mu Pauling" said:=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AHeat issues you mention with UTP are gone; wi= th the [ 803.bz ]( http://803.bz ) stuff (i.e Base-N). =0AIt was mostly due= to the 10G-Base-T spec being old and out of line with the SFP+ spec ; whic= h led to higher power consumption than SFP+ cages were rated to draw and af= orementioned heat problems; this is not a problem with newer kit.=0AIt went= away with the move to smaller silicon processes and now UTP based 10G in t= he home devices are more common and don't suffer from the fragility issues = of the earlier copper based 10G spec. The AQC chipsets were the first to in= troduce it but most other vendors have finally picked it up after 5 years o= r feet dragging. =0A=0A=0AOn Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:16 AM David P. Reed <[ = dpreed@deepplum.com ]( mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com )> wrote:=0AYes, it's ver= y cheap and getting cheaper.=0A =0ASince its price fell to the point I thou= ght was cheap, my home has a 10 GigE fiber backbone, 2 switches in my main = centers of computers, lots of 10 GigE NICs in servers, and even dual 10 Gig= E adapters in a Thunderbolt 3 external adapter for my primary desktop, whic= h is a Skull Canyon NUC.=0A =0AI strongly recommend people use fiber and sf= p+ DAC cabling because twisted pair, while cheaper, actually is problematic= at speeds above 1 Gig - mostly due to power and heat.=0A =0ABTW, it's wort= h pointing out that USB 3.1 can handle 10 Gb/sec, too, and USB-C connectors= and cables can carry Thunderbolt at higher rates. Those adapters are REAL= LY CHEAP. There's nothing inherently different about the electronics, if an= ything, USB 3.1 is more complicate logic than the ethernet MAC.=0A =0ASo th= e reason 10 GigE is still far more expensive than USB 3.1 is mainly market = volume - if 10 GigE were a consumer product, not a datacenter product, you'= d think it would already be as cheap as USB 3.1 in computers and switches.= =0A =0ASince DOCSIS can support up to 5 Gb/s, I think, when will Internet A= ccess Providers start offering "Cable Modems" that support customers who wa= nt more than "a full Gig"? Given all the current DOCSIS 3 CMTS's etc. out t= here, it's just a configuration change. =0A =0ASo when will consumer "route= rs" support 5 Gig, 10 Gig?=0A =0AOn Thursday, December 16, 2021 11:20am, "D= ave Taht" <[ dave.taht@gmail.com ]( mailto:dave.taht@gmail.com )> said:=0A= =0A=0A=0A> has really got cheap.=0A> =0A> [ https://www.tomshardware.com/ne= ws/innodisk-m2-2280-10gbe-adapter ]( https://www.tomshardware.com/news/inno= disk-m2-2280-10gbe-adapter )=0A> =0A> On the other hand users are reporting= issues with actually using=0A> 2.5ghz cable with this router in particular= , halving the achieved rate=0A> by negotiating 2.5gbit vs negotiating 1gbit= .=0A> =0A> [ https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=3D179145#p897836 ](= https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=3D179145#p897836 )=0A> =0A> =0A= > --=0A> I tried to build a better future, a few times:=0A> [ https://wayfo= rward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org ]( https://wayforward.= archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org )=0A> =0A> Dave T=C3=A4ht CE= O, TekLibre, LLC=0A> _______________________________________________=0A> Ce= rowrt-devel mailing list=0A> [ Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net ]( mailt= o:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net )=0A> [ https://lists.bufferbloat.net= /listinfo/cerowrt-devel ]( https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-d= evel )=0A>_______________________________________________=0A Cerowrt-devel = mailing list=0A[ Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net ]( mailto:Cerowrt-deve= l@lists.bufferbloat.net )=0A[ https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowr= t-devel ]( https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel ) ------=_20211216162925000000_87288 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks, That's good to= know...The whole SFP+ adapter concept has seemed to me to be a "tweener" i= n hardware design space. Too many failure points. That said, I like fiber's= properties as a medium for distances.

=0A

 =0A

 

=0A

On Thursday, Dec= ember 16, 2021 2:31pm, "Joel Wir=C4=81mu Pauling" <joel@aenertia.net>= said:

=0A
=0A
=0A
Heat issues you mention with UTP are gone; with the 803.bz stuff (i.e Base-N).
=0A
It was mostly due to the 10G-Bas= e-T spec being old and out of line with the SFP+ spec ; which led to higher= power consumption than SFP+ cages were rated to draw and aforementioned he= at problems; this is not a problem with newer kit.
=0A
It went away with t= he move to smaller silicon processes and now UTP based 10G in the home devi= ces are more common and don't suffer from the fragility issues of the earli= er copper based 10G spec. The AQC chipsets were the first to introduce it b= ut most other vendors have finally picked it up after 5 years or feet dragg= ing.
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:16 AM David P. Reed <= dpreed@deepplum.com> wrote:=0A
=0A

Yes, it's very cheap and getting cheaper.

=0A

&nb= sp;

=0A

Since its price fell to the point I thought = was cheap, my home has a 10 GigE fiber backbone, 2 switches in my main cent= ers of computers, lots of 10 GigE NICs in servers, and even dual 10 GigE ad= apters in a Thunderbolt 3 external adapter for my primary desktop, which is= a Skull Canyon NUC.

=0A

 

=0A

I strongly recommend people use fiber and sfp+ DAC cabling because t= wisted pair, while cheaper, actually is problematic at speeds above 1 Gig -= mostly due to power and heat.

=0A

 

=0A

BTW, it's worth pointing out that USB 3.1 can handle 10 Gb= /sec, too, and USB-C connectors and cables can carry Thunderbolt at higher = rates.  Those adapters are REALLY CHEAP. There's nothing inherently di= fferent about the electronics, if anything, USB 3.1 is more complicate logi= c than the ethernet MAC.

=0A

 

=0A

So the reason 10 GigE is still far more expensive than USB 3.1= is mainly market volume - if 10 GigE were a consumer product, not a datace= nter product, you'd think it would already be as cheap as USB 3.1 in comput= ers and switches.

=0A

 

=0A

Since DOCSIS can support up to 5 Gb/s, I think, when will Internet Acce= ss Providers start offering "Cable Modems" that support customers who want = more than "a full Gig"? Given all the current DOCSIS 3 CMTS's etc. out ther= e, it's just a configuration change. 

=0A

 = ;

=0A

So when will consumer "routers" support 5 Gig,= 10 Gig?

=0A

 

=0A

On Th= ursday, December 16, 2021 11:20am, "Dave Taht" <dave.taht@gmail.com> said:

=0A
=0A> has really got cheap.
>
> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/innodisk-m2-2280-10gbe-adapt= er
>
> On the other hand users are reporting issues wi= th actually using
> 2.5ghz cable with this router in particular, ha= lving the achieved rate
> by negotiating 2.5gbit vs negotiating 1gb= it.
>
> https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopi= c.php?t=3D179145#p897836
>
>
> --
> I= tried to build a better future, a few times:
> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org
>
> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> _____________= __________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://list= s.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>

=0A
=0A_____= __________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list=
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
=0A=0A
 ------=_20211216162925000000_87288--