100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Mike Hammett
I first sent to an IX-specific mailing list, but as I have yet to see the message hit the list, I figured I would post it here as well. We've had multiple requests for 100G interfaces (instead of Nx10G) and no one seems to care about the 40G interfaces we have available. Looking at cost

Re: 100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Raymond Burkholder
On 08/20/17 13:30, Mike Hammett wrote: DNX/Jericho would have sufficient buffers to handle the rate conversions? You could try Mellanox. Some of the promotional stuff I've seen/heard indicates their focus on appropriate sized buffers & low packet loss on rate conversion. - Mike

Re: 100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Mike Hammett
DNX/Jericho would have sufficient buffers to handle the rate conversions? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Joel Jaeggli" To: "Mike Hammett"

Re: 100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Fredrik Korsbäck
The only viable merchant silicon chip that would be useful for a IXP is from the StrataDNX-family which house the jericho/qumran/petra/arad chips from broadcom. No packetbuffer in the exhangepoint will shred performance significantly, especially when one of your bursty 100G customers starts

Re: 100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Joel Jaeggli
> On Aug 20, 2017, at 08:45, Mike Hammett wrote: > > Any particular hardware platforms to go towards or avoid? Broadcom Tomahawk > seems to be quite popular with varying control planes. LINX went Edgecore, > which was on my list given my experience with other Accton

Re: 100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Bill Woodcock
Why don't we just swap out your 40g switch for a 100g switch? You've had the 40g one for a while, and we anticipate upgrades every 18-24 months. -Bill > On Aug 20, 2017, at 08:46, Mike Hammett wrote: > > I first sent to an IX-specific mailing list, but

Re: 100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Mikael Abrahamsson
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017, Nick Hilliard wrote: Mostly you can engineer around this, but it's not as simple as saying that small-buffer switches aren't suitable for an IXP. Could you please elaborate on this? How do you engineer around having basically no buffers at all, and especially if these

Re: 100G - Whitebox

2017-08-20 Thread Nick Hilliard
Fredrik Korsbäck wrote: > The only viable merchant silicon chip that would be useful for a IXP > is from the StrataDNX-family which house the > jericho/qumran/petra/arad chips from broadcom. No packetbuffer in the > exhangepoint will shred performance significantly, especially when > one of your