Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Joel Wirāmu Pauling" <joel@aenertia.net>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] LCA 2018 talk available
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 11:13:03 +1300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKiAkGRZ=c-YnuKDdcWcpONArvTjreviPhJi5FU0vx-FLfM6cA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802141409030.3478@uplift.swm.pp.se>

If  POF (Plastic Optical Fibre) like install methods can be scaled up
to Polymer/Glass runs (Sharpie knife slicing/jam into receptor). I
don't see this being the problem. Depending on the Sheathing fibre is
just as good as UTP cabling. Magnitudes cheaper too.

When I learnt of POF I was excited, until I learned how it's severely
limited in the bandwidth/frequency transmission department.

I guess if we could get some sort of Clamp-on USB-C style adaptor for
fibre would probably be the ideal. I don't really see why this
couldn't work with MPO style fibre.


On 15 February 2018 at 02:21, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2018, Joel Wirāmu Pauling wrote:
>
>> Again it's not the speed, it's the throughput. TB3 delivers near to what
>> my local x86 can do in terms of throughput. Also network should never be
>> slower than disc. Since NVME has been around this is no-longer true. It's an
>> unnatural order of things.
>
>
> Having done networking since mid 80-ties, having the network be slower than
> disk has been the reality, forever, for me. The only time this might not
> have been true would be in the beginning of 1GBASE time, where single HDDs
> were slower than network. With in 10BASE-2 days, HDDs were doing a magnitude
> higher transfer speeds compared to network. Running NFS was slow compared to
> local drive.
>
>> Cabling is the issue in my mind right now. Every laptop with tb3 ports
>> has 10G+ capability, if passive optical long run was cheap and easily
>> available for tb3 then half the problem would already be solved.
>
>
> Cabling fiber is unfortunately always quite a lot harder and more
> complicated than copper, that's why RJ45 won. Having factory-made fiber
> cable with USB-C connectors at each end might work, if the active
> electronics can be made small enough. Think pulling these through holes in
> walls, through cable management etc. Unfortunately I doubt these will reach
> enough volume in near time to really become widely used due to their initial
> high cost.
>
>> Maybe 10G over cat6a will be ok as the evolution. But you have to go to
>> cat8 to get anything beyond 10G... so the cabling situation and incentive to
>> upgrade to future-proof isn't there.
>
>
> If we need higher than 10G speeds, then yes, fiber is the next natural
> evolution. I don't know how we're going to make single-mode fiber something
> that the average user can handle without problems. There are advantages
> though.
>
> I am getting FTTH now. The cable they're putting is looks like this:
>
> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154951833141595&set=p.10154951833141595&type=3&theater
>
> It has 3 strands and it's single mode.
>
> So if we can light up these at a good cost/power/size compromise, the cables
> can be made extremely thin. Still wondering how the connectors etc are going
> to look like to make this end user friendly.
>
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-14 22:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CAKiAkGRDb_fgyBLtR=HzYKXFJAJ_A2jp2u4-HOLE4iN3NG5MoQ@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found] ` <CAKiAkGS4O7oyskY_ft6NOpUob1ytZDewZt5Bv7W_XL2=SyEEQQ@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]   ` <CAKiAkGTGfrW92E8-ZC1+ZaCxuzYFhkiy=jpmcuCUx15k7DExZg@mail.gmail.com>
2018-01-25  3:30     ` Joel Wirāmu Pauling
2018-02-14 11:33       ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2018-02-14 11:45         ` Joel Wirāmu Pauling
2018-02-14 11:45           ` Joel Wirāmu Pauling
2018-02-14 13:21           ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2018-02-14 22:13             ` Joel Wirāmu Pauling [this message]
2018-02-15  9:59               ` Mikael Abrahamsson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAKiAkGRZ=c-YnuKDdcWcpONArvTjreviPhJi5FU0vx-FLfM6cA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=joel@aenertia.net \
    --cc=cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=swmike@swm.pp.se \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox