> Op 20 feb. 2015, om 10:57 heeft Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]> het > volgende geschreven: > > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Andrew Mcgregor wrote: > >> Why? PIM and MLD snooping are pretty standard on very low-end enterprise >> switches, which will be next year's midrange consumer models. If the >> dumb-as-rocks stuff goes away, that would generally make people happier. > > There are enterprise switches out there currently (pretty expensive ones) > that still do not have MLD snooping, and the ones having PIM snooping is most > likely a lot less. I've been in the networking industry for close to 20 > years, the first "bridge" I laid hands on was a pretty advanced thing back in > the time with 3 AUI ports, and could barely do 10 megabit/s. I've then seen > the evolution into 100meg hubs, then 10/100 dual speed hubs (basically two > hubs with a switch in between), to 10/100 switches with all ports switched, > to gig equivalent etc. During this entire time, switches that could do IGMP > snooping has always been substantially more expensive, mostly (I guess) they > couldn't be implemented in pure switch silicon, but always required > administration interface, operating system etc. Still today, these typically > cost 100 USD or more, when you can buy a stupid one for 30USD. So yes, over > time this might change, but I still think there will be cost involved. It > might be that the h omenet "routers" are going to look quite different than the typical router we see today when it comes to phsyical ports. Or perhaps they're only going to have 2-3 ports and the rest is going to be wifi. What do I know. > > What I do know is that so far, cable has always been a lot better than radio. > Lots of support calls to ISPs end up being related to wifi problems. I have > CAT6 to every room in my apartment, but then again, I am not a typical user. > However, I often speak to people who have performance problems who then end > up pulling a physical cable and after that their problems are solved. > > With 60GHz wifi, you're going to need line-of-sight to every AP from the > clients, which will probably be located in the ceiling in every room where > you want good performance. These APs are going to need physical cables for > uplinks to get any meaningful bump in performance. > > I have thought of this as mostly L3 network.
What I can add: the multicast snooping feature could be somewhat behind development and deployment of the standards and / or buggy. So some administrators switch off the snooping / rate limiting feature. I do. L3 all the way to switch ports make the network more robust. But this requires L3 forwarding in hardware, multicast routing and adjustments in discovery protocols. Can all multicast forwarding be performed in hardware? Do you have CAT6 to WiFi APs in every room? Can you share experience with moving WiFi devices? Teco > I thought the service discovery problem between subnets was being solved or > had been solved. >> From the discussion here the past few days it's clear to me now that the > mind image of what a future homenet is differs a lot between participants in > this working group. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
