nanog mailing list archives
Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now
From: Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:07:59 -0400
On Sep 27, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Darius Jahandarie <djahandarie () gmail com> wrote:
I recall 40Gbit/s Ethernet being promoted heavily for similar reasons as the ones in this article, but then 100Gbit/s being the technology that actually ended up in most places. Could this be the same thing happening?
I would say yes, except for the physics involved here. Getting the signal done optically is the "easy" part. I'm not concerned if the next step after 100 is 400. It's in the right direction and a fair multiple. There is also a problem in the 100GbE space where the market pricing hasn't yet reached an amount whereby the economics are "close enough" to push people beyond N*10G. - Jared
Current thread:
- /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Eugen Leitl (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Darius Jahandarie (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Leo Bicknell (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now George Herbert (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Jared Mauch (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now jim deleskie (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Rosenthal Phil (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Mikael Abrahamsson (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Steve Meuse (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Leo Bicknell (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Masataka Ohta (Sep 29)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Jimmy Hess (Sep 30)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now joel jaeggli (Sep 30)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Masataka Ohta (Sep 30)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Darius Jahandarie (Sep 27)
- Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now Tom Hill (Sep 30)