From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 878583B29E; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 07:41:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id C61AAB0; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:41:28 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1512391288; bh=S70Q7NSsyI9JUw2vSLK/ZBkYZ2Py4Wyibcbo+pNj/q8=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=xb3G5ORGxoAzfw8ajOavYm83CYo2WWoduJLEe4jfeGFgsQTtxjd+l7lwJA3/X3axx ZcdgBceCU8RKnEjeJo5DrZsn0jlIAXBaWNrFoWoJZQ/T+6jOlttvSu6lvxenwwwEM+ GX94F5DvEJMbFhIFl80EE0dg802JMn0e07n4mE2A= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C43EFAF; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:41:28 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:41:28 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: =?UTF-8?Q?Joel_Wir=C4=81mu_Pauling?= cc: Dave Taht , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , bloat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <92906bd8-7bad-945d-83c8-a2f9598aac2c@lackof.org> <87bmjff7l6.fsf_-_@nemesis.taht.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="-137064504-1281405519-1512391288=:8884" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DC behaviors today 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: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:41:30 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---137064504-1281405519-1512391288=:8884 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Mon, 4 Dec 2017, Joel Wirāmu Pauling wrote: > How to deliver a switch, when the wiring and port standard isn't > actually workable? Not workable? > 10GBase-T is out of Voltage Spec with SFP+ ; you can get copper SFP+ Yep, the "Cu SFP" was a luxury for a while. Physics is harsh mistress though. > but they are out of spec... 10GbaseT doesn't really work over Cat5e > more than a couple of meters (if you are lucky) and even Cat6 is only > rated at 30M... there is a reason no-one is producing Home Copper > switches and it's not just the NIC Silicon cost (that was a factor > until Recently obviously, but only part of the equation). I have CAT6 in my home, and not more than 30 meters anywhere. So it would work for me. You need CAT6e for 100M, so anyone doing new installs should use that. Stiff cable, though. > On the flip side: > Right now I am typing this via a 40gbit network, comprised of the > cheap and readily available Tb3 port - it's daisy chained and limited > to 6 ports, but right now it's easily the cheapest and most effective > port. Pitty that the fabled optical tb3 cables are damn expensive... > so you're limited to daisy-chains of 2m. They seem to have screwed the > pooch on the USB-C network standard quite badly - which looked so > promising, so for the moment Tb3 it is for me at least. With that distance, you could probably run 10GE over CAT3 wiring. So there is a reason 10GE requires more for longer distances, because it's bad cable so instead you need lots of power and DSPs to figure out what's going on. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se ---137064504-1281405519-1512391288=:8884--