Why does Gigabit throughput require such high end hardware?
-
There are pockets of excellence.
-
One of those "pockets of excellence" is about to be New York (both the state and city):
http://www.nysbroadband.ny.gov/broadband-goals
Basically, the minimum service in the state will be 100Mbps down / 50Mbps up unless you're super-rural, in which case it's 25Mbps down.
The US has a more general plan to deliver similar speeds to at 100 million homes by 2020.
-
Plans are nice…
-
So is government force.
-
Government forcing standards and prodding along progress would be nice.
I have a very bleak outlook on plans and promises.
I think it would be nice if we got back at trying to be the best in the world with tech and industry.
Having blazing fast internet couldn't hurt. If that got combined with dirt cheap power it would make even more difference. -
I picked up an Ubiquity Edge Router Lite and have been fooling with it, not what I need but an interesting little $100 box.
For testing Vyatta style CLI out or learning this the router is really one of the best.
For a small router inside of SMB networks (LAN) it could be also a really good router.The web GUI (that I really need as I"m not a network expert) is really limited and much of the configuration must be done at the command line mode.
But if you have to install and configure 150 routers, you will love it because you
can use a script to do the most things!The increased cost of 10gb yet alone the increase power usage of 10gb switches and NICs is hard to justify at home. I hope some next gen ASICs bring down power/heat and cost.
Not the best network company, not the best switch, but 2 SFP+ ports!
D-Link DGS-1510-20 for ~200 €! -
Power isn't that big of an issue if you are not running lots of hardware in a data center or running off solar.
-
The max wattage on several 24 port 10Gb switches is in the 200-300 range, which is about the same as my *computer, my wife's *computer, my 24port 1Gb switch and firewall put together. Idle power isn't much better, typically only low double digit percentages less.
*Excluding monitors
Once we start seeing 10Gb fabbed in the 20nm or 15nm ranges, the power consumption should be dramatically reduced.
There is already talk about 2.5Gb and 5Gb standards. I guess these can easily done with current fabs and are able to get full rates at 100m over CAT5e and CAT6 respectively. 2.5Gb is supposed to be nearly identical power consumption as 1Gb.
-
The max wattage on several 24 port 10Gb switches is in the 200-300 range, which is about the same as my *computer, my wife's *computer, my 24port 1Gb switch and firewall put together. Idle power isn't much better, typically only low double digit percentages less.
*Excluding monitors
Once we start seeing 10Gb fabbed in the 20nm or 15nm ranges, the power consumption should be dramatically reduced.
There is already talk about 2.5Gb and 5Gb standards. I guess these can easily done with current fabs and are able to get full rates at 100m over CAT5e and CAT6 respectively. 2.5Gb is supposed to be nearly identical power consumption as 1Gb.
2.5G is a backplane technology. The only IEEE standards activity in this area is a "study group", which is not a "working group".
The call for forming a working group has been voted down, repeatedly: http://www.ieee802.org/3/minutes/nov03/1103_CFI_2_5G_report.pdf,
but the parties concerned managed to pass a vote for a "study group" last November.So good luck with that. Low-power 10GbaseT PHYs are already starting to appear, and many manufacturers are starting to "build in" 10Gbps on their SoC and motherboard designs. Once you have it on the desktop, it will start to appear in SMB and Enterprise. The datacenter will always be fiber (cross cabinet) or coax (in-cabinet).
Netgear sells an 8-port 10Gb switch that consumes 58.8W, max. How many computers did you have in your house again?
-
I don't think the power requirement of my switch is a big deal for my house…
So many places to save power that if my switch is not super-green, I will live.
Its nice to find a good fast green one, but 60w isn't going to break me.
I'm not dismissing the need for low power equipment. I'm just saying.
Unless you are running ALOT of switches, one burning more than 5w isn't the end of the world for a home network.
-
All powered by the NSA :D
-
Well - For those guys, 1w differences on hardware adds up quick. 60w switches would be a huge deal when you have 1000s upon 1000s of switches. haha
-
:D Thats why they put the new hub in Utah….Lots of sun all year round! :D
Only the sun can generate enough power unless they build a nuclear PP next to it #love #USA #freedom
-
@gonzopancho:
The datacenter will always be fiber (cross cabinet) or coax (in-cabinet).
Coax? Seriously? Color me skeptical…
-
OK, Twinax, which is just coax with two conductors instead of one.
Twinax is even good enough for 40Gbps to about 5m. How tall is your cabinet again?
-
Power isn't that big of an issue if you are not running lots of hardware in a data center or running off solar.
In either case, power is the biggest 'deal'.
-
:D Thats why they put the new hub in Utah….Lots of sun all year round! :D
Only the sun can generate enough power unless they build a nuclear PP next to it #love #USA #freedom
It's actually not why the new NSA data center is in Utah. For that you can blame Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who is
the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee.http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/56472070-90/utah-nsa-data-center.html.csp
-
@gonzopancho:
The max wattage on several 24 port 10Gb switches is in the 200-300 range, which is about the same as my *computer, my wife's *computer, my 24port 1Gb switch and firewall put together. Idle power isn't much better, typically only low double digit percentages less.
*Excluding monitors
Once we start seeing 10Gb fabbed in the 20nm or 15nm ranges, the power consumption should be dramatically reduced.
There is already talk about 2.5Gb and 5Gb standards. I guess these can easily done with current fabs and are able to get full rates at 100m over CAT5e and CAT6 respectively. 2.5Gb is supposed to be nearly identical power consumption as 1Gb.
2.5G is a backplane technology. The only IEEE standards activity in this area is a "study group", which is not a "working group".
The call for forming a working group has been voted down, repeatedly: http://www.ieee802.org/3/minutes/nov03/1103_CFI_2_5G_report.pdf,
but the parties concerned managed to pass a vote for a "study group" last November.So good luck with that. Low-power 10GbaseT PHYs are already starting to appear, and many manufacturers are starting to "build in" 10Gbps on their SoC and motherboard designs. Once you have it on the desktop, it will start to appear in SMB and Enterprise. The datacenter will always be fiber (cross cabinet) or coax (in-cabinet).
Netgear sells an 8-port 10Gb switch that consumes 58.8W, max. How many computers did you have in your house again?
The low power 10Gb NICs are made on the 14nm process and are part of the SOC. All other non-SOC chipsets are still using 1-2 generation old fab processes, so 32nm or 45nm. Many years back, Intel said 10Gb won't be cheap or low power enough until 22nm. So until we start seeing 22nm chipsets or more SOCs using 22nm or smaller, we won't have 10Gb on general motherboards for cheap. Those new 40Gb NICs from Intel are on 28nm and are lower power than the x540 10Gb NICs that I assume are on 32nm. 4x faster than ~15% less power. And that's only 28nm. 22nm and 14nm are going to make 10Gb common.
-
… and you've completely ignored the PHY, which is where the real power consumption occurs.
10GBase-T components today require anywhere from 2 to 5 watts per port at each end of the cable –depending on the distance of the cable –while SFP+ requires approximately 0.7 watt, regardless of distance.
-
Sounds like we need to switch to optical only…
