DOCSIS 3 Internal PCI-Express Cable Modem Card
-
I do agree with John.
I use an old ISP Provided "PPPOE" over FTTC, and not the Box they provided me, which would of been a cheap as shit Wireless Router, i use an White BT Box (Sorry for the flippant term, cant for the life of me remember the Connection Tech it uses or the Hardware Manu, But i use that paired with PFSense.
Does the job perfectly, dont notice any problems at all.
-
Fiber is a completely different story since FTTP (Fiber To The Prem) brings a standard fiber line into your home in which you can simply plug into an existing fiber channel card, get the PPPoE instructions from your ISP and away you go. 8)
FTTN (Fiber To The Node) typically uses copper for the 'Last Mile' going from the distribution box. That last mile is either Coaxial or RJ11. In the case of RJ11 you can still use a PPPoE setup but you're already using RJ11 and that's going to be horrible in terms of speed and latency especially the further you get from the DSLAM. >:(
In a FTTN situation where Coax is used for the last mile you typically have an extremely short distance of copper (in terms of the entire connection length). The consumer has no control of anything past the drop towards their ISP. Basically you have a direct fiber connection except for this 'Last Mile'. Why not directly convert back to fiber, or as close to it as possible once it passes the drop back into our home/office?
The Chelsio line of ASIC provides EXCELLENT latency, sub millisecond down to around 25 microseconds. The optimal solution would be to bridge the Ethernet PHY to the Ethernet PHY of a 'modem on chip' ASIC or something a little deeper and more integrated if you're not using a modem on chip solution. I guarantee you would receive at minimum an order of magnitude latency reduction as well as maxing out the line rate supplied from the your purchased plan. 8) :-*
https://www.chelsio.com/terminator-6-asic/
In the crude design above we have our Chelsio T6 ASIC interfacing with the 'Modem On Chip ASIC' via one of its two provided ethernet interfaces. The secondary free interface is not wasted and we provide a SFP+ port to be made available for the user to do with as they see fit. The T6 ASIC then interfaces with the host machine and presents itself as two available NIC, one dedicated to WAN which has been coupled with the modem on chip. Throw a huge heatsync over the entire thing with a dual 40mm fans and away we go!
Again, I think a card of this particular type design, for at least a first wave of exploring the real user demand for something like this, would be extremely attractive.
More research is needed as the bottleneck in this scenario would be the Modem on Chip.
-
Fiber is a completely different story since FTTP (Fiber To The Prem) brings a standard fiber line into your home in which you can simply plug into an existing fiber channel card, get the PPPoE instructions from your ISP and away you go.
…assuming you have a terrible ISP that uses PPPoE. otherwise, you just get IP packets.
-
I think pfsense is really great at being a firewall. I think you shouldn't drop in modems and wifi cards. Likely to cause you WAY more problems than some infinitesimal modicum of latency a separate modem might cause.
-
Fiber is a completely different story since FTTP (Fiber To The Prem) brings a standard fiber line into your home in which you can simply plug into an existing fiber channel card, get the PPPoE instructions from your ISP and away you go. 8)
FTTN (Fiber To The Node) typically uses copper for the 'Last Mile' going from the distribution box. That last mile is either Coaxial or RJ11. In the case of RJ11 you can still use a PPPoE setup but you're already using RJ11 and that's going to be horrible in terms of speed and latency especially the further you get from the DSLAM. >:(
In a FTTN situation where Coax is used for the last mile you typically have an extremely short distance of copper (in terms of the entire connection length). The consumer has no control of anything past the drop towards their ISP. Basically you have a direct fiber connection except for this 'Last Mile'. Why not directly convert back to fiber, or as close to it as possible once it passes the drop back into our home/office?
The Chelsio line of ASIC provides EXCELLENT latency, sub millisecond down to around 25 microseconds. The optimal solution would be to bridge the Ethernet PHY to the Ethernet PHY of a 'modem on chip' ASIC or something a little deeper and more integrated if you're not using a modem on chip solution. I guarantee you would receive at minimum an order of magnitude latency reduction as well as maxing out the line rate supplied from the your purchased plan. 8) :-*
https://www.chelsio.com/terminator-6-asic/
In the crude design above we have our Chelsio T6 ASIC interfacing with the 'Modem On Chip ASIC' via one of its two provided ethernet interfaces. The secondary free interface is not wasted and we provide a SFP+ port to be made available for the user to do with as they see fit. The T6 ASIC then interfaces with the host machine and presents itself as two available NIC, one dedicated to WAN which has been coupled with the modem on chip. Throw a huge heatsync over the entire thing with a dual 40mm fans and away we go!
Again, I think a card of this particular type design, for at least a first wave of exploring the real user demand for something like this, would be extremely attractive.
This doesn't actually change anything compared to a bridge mode cable modem. In fact, it pretty much is a cable modem. That is just the issue here: all of the proposed "solutions" are just normal modems crammed on a PCI(e) card with a ethernet interface to the host. It doesn't change a thing, except physical form factor.
