Aquantia 10GBase-T TB3 self powered, adapters are now available. They
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.
Interestingly the NVME stuff came about by a competing teams during
the same time as Lightpeak. They share many underlying philosophies.
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.
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.
On 15 February 2018 at 00:33, Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Joel Wirāmu Pauling wrote:
>> Kia Ora (Hi in Māori).
>> Today I delivered my talk on 10Gbit(+) in the home at Linuxconf
>> Australasia. Some specific shout outs to those on the list who helped form
>> some of the content and especially for the continued efforts with FLENT
>> which I have been making extensive use of both professionally and
>> Hopefully this is of some interest and use to people on the list.
> Great presentation, thanks.
> Some feedback. I have been told MOCA is widely used in USA, and this is
> in-house coax cabling used for providing IP based services in multiple
> Now, this doesn't have much to do with your 10GE talk as it's not going to
> be that fast, but anyway. So back to > 1GE speeds.
> It seems to me that 1GE is good enough for a lot of user needs. It's over
> 100 megabyte/s, most HDDs won't even transfer faster than this. Most devices
> do not have anything faster than 1GE, so it's a chicken and egg problem. I
> have a 100EUR fanless managable 24 port switch with 4 SFP ports. I imagine
> anything faster than this would require fans and would bring up the cost a
> It would be ideal to have a 24 port 1GE + 4 (or 8) ports of 1/2.5/5/10GE for
> incremental migration, but I have 0 things in my home that speaks anything
> faster than 1GBASE-T (with RJ45 connector). I do have SFP+ based NIC cards
> and DAC cables, but I don't even use them (apart from occasional testing).
> The upgrade was from 100BASE-T to 1GBASE-T was fairly cheap and addressed a
> wide need, since 10-11 megabyte/s was slower than most HDDs even 15-20 years
> ago. Today, 100-110megabyte/s at 1GBASE-T speeds is actually still quite
> decent, and most people don't have huge amounts of data to move around. So
> for most people, anything faster than 1GBASE-T doesn't address a problem
> they actually have. Yes, for people handling 4k footage and doing video
> editing etc, they need faster. But most people don't. For them a 8-24 port
> 1GBASE-T switch is fine, and provides a networking solution that is not
> bottlenecking them in any significant fashion.
> 2.5G and 5G would be a good compromise, but it seems to be stuck in
> chicken/egg problem space. Most people actually don't even wire their
> computers today, it's all wifi, and even if they do wire them, the only NIC
> available is 1GBASE-T based.
> The iMac Pro is the first prosumer device I have seen that actually supports
> faster networking. If Apple or someone else actually released a thunderbolt
> based NIC that was decently sized/priced that did support 2.5G or 5GBASE-T,
> then this chicken/egg problem could perhaps be solved. Most people don't
> feel the need to connect these kinds of things to their laptop:
> http://www.tehutinetworks.net/?t=LV&L1=3&L2=0&L3=0&L7=157 is interesting, as
> this is not huge. It also does 2.5G and 5G.
> 300USD is still a significant chunk of money compared to the 29USD 1GBASE-T
> thunderbolt2 adapter that Apple sells.
> But still, with these kinds of products, there might be hope!
> Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se
Cerowrt-devel mailing list