Re: [Cerowrt-devel] 10gige and 2.5gige

["Joel Wirāmu Pauling" <joel@aenertia.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7708 bytes --]

Completely aside I have never got Cake SQM to work with connection's beyond
about a gigabit biderectional ; without loosing gigabits of throughput even
when running on beefy hardware. Has been a problem here for some time  now.

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 9:36 pm Joel Wirāmu Pauling, <joel@aenertia.net> wrote:

> The XG PON ONT units from Nokia/Huawei are coming with only 10G NbaseT
> (usually singular port) only in the consumer access space. No SFP+
>
> We have rolled out XG PON on the PON side to 70% of the country here  (NZ)
> over the last 2 years. Only a small % of that are actually making use of
> the XGPON on the consumer side and retailers vary in offering it as a
> service mainly due to having to truck roll a new ONT and lack of in home
> 10G kit on the market. But the access network is there.
>
> Similar stories in other regions I know of that offer XGPon - lack of
> consumer demand, lack of ONTs in the market that are suitable for
> residential use.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 9:18 pm Sebastian Moeller, <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> To add to Joel's point,
>>
>> I can do my own catX cable runs and connect sockets/plugs to the cables,
>> but I lack the tools for fiber-splicing... as cool as that would be it is
>> going to be hard to justify multi-100s EUR for a splicer.. That still
>> leaves short distance in the main computing area of an appartment/house,
>> but I doubt that many consumers have a concentration high enough to justify
>> the costs even there.
>>
>> What I do see over here in Europe, with FTTH-roll out speeding up, is CPE
>> that offer SFP/SFP+ cages for the WAN side though, SFP+ becoming more
>> common since ISPs started to deploy XGS-PON (gross 10Gpbs bidirectionally,
>> after FEC ~8.5 Gbps).
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>         Sebastian
>>
>> P.S.: I have not started jumping on the 2.5 Gbps or higher train just
>> yet, none of my devices seems massively underserved with just 1Gbps yet
>> (with the potential exception of a single link where >= 2Gbps would be nice
>> since I am one cabe short and >2Gbps would allow to multiplex two 1Gbps
>> connections over that cable).
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 16, 2021, at 22:57, Joel Wirāmu Pauling <joel@aenertia.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Yes but as much as I like fibre; it's too fragile for the average
>> household structured cabling real world use case. Not to mention nothing
>> consumwe comes with SFP+ in the home space.
>> >
>> > On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 10:43 am David Lang, <david@lang.hm> wrote:
>> > another valuable featur of fiber for home use is that fiber can't
>> contribute to
>> > ground loops the way that copper cables can.
>> >
>> > and for the paranoid (like me :-) ) fiber also means that any
>> electrical
>> > disaster that happens to one end won't propgate through and fry other
>> equipment
>> >
>> > David Lang
>> >
>> > On Thu, 16 Dec 2021, David P. Reed wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks, 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.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thursday, December 16, 2021 2:31pm, "Joel Wirāmu Pauling" <
>> joel@aenertia.net> said:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Heat issues you mention with UTP are gone; with the [ 803.bz ](
>> http://803.bz ) stuff (i.e Base-N).
>> > > It was mostly due to the 10G-Base-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 heat problems; this is not a problem
>> with newer kit.
>> > > It went away with the move to smaller silicon processes and now UTP
>> based 10G in the 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 introduce it but most other vendors have finally picked
>> it up after 5 years or feet dragging.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:16 AM David P. Reed <[ dpreed@deepplum.com
>> ]( mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com )> wrote:
>> > > Yes, it's very cheap and getting cheaper.
>> > >
>> > > Since its price fell to the point I thought 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 GigE adapters in a Thunderbolt 3
>> external adapter for my primary desktop, which is a Skull Canyon NUC.
>> > >
>> > > I strongly recommend people use fiber and sfp+ DAC cabling because
>> twisted pair, while cheaper, actually is problematic at speeds above 1 Gig
>> - mostly due to power and heat.
>> > >
>> > > 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 different about
>> the electronics, if anything, USB 3.1 is more complicate logic than the
>> ethernet MAC.
>> > >
>> > > 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 datacenter
>> product, you'd think it would already be as cheap as USB 3.1 in computers
>> and switches.
>> > >
>> > > Since DOCSIS can support up to 5 Gb/s, I think, when will Internet
>> Access 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
>> there, it's just a configuration change.
>> > >
>> > > So when will consumer "routers" support 5 Gig, 10 Gig?
>> > >
>> > > On Thursday, December 16, 2021 11:20am, "Dave Taht" <[
>> dave.taht@gmail.com ]( mailto:dave.taht@gmail.com )> said:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> has really got cheap.
>> > >>
>> > >> [ https://www.tomshardware.com/news/innodisk-m2-2280-10gbe-adapter
>> ]( https://www.tomshardware.com/news/innodisk-m2-2280-10gbe-adapter )
>> > >>
>> > >> On the other hand users are reporting issues with actually using
>> > >> 2.5ghz cable with this router in particular, halving the achieved
>> rate
>> > >> by negotiating 2.5gbit vs negotiating 1gbit.
>> > >>
>> > >> [ https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=179145#p897836 ](
>> https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=179145#p897836 )
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> I tried to build a better future, a few times:
>> > >> [ https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org
>> ]( https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org )
>> > >>
>> > >> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>> > >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> > >> [ Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net ]( mailto:
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net )
>> > >> [ https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel ](
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel )
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>> > > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> > > [ Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net ]( mailto:
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net )
>> > > [ https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel ](
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> )_______________________________________________
>> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 11843 bytes --]