nanog mailing list archives
Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon?
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:19:13 +0300
On 16 June 2016 at 06:21, Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke () gmail com> wrote:
Based on their investors, could have interesting results for much lower cost 100GbE whitebox switches.
Why lower cost? The BOM isn't the expensive part, the code is the expensive part. Only way I see this happening, is if we get open source routing suite for the box, i.e. 0 cost software. If you're thinking of writing your own routing suite, even if your requirements are trivial, it's still probably take 2-3 years and +2MUSD in salaries, and then maintenance +300kUSD/year in salaries. Need quite significant annual unit number scale to make it cheap. I'm quite fascinated by the idea of doing something really novel in routing suite space, but I don't see how it could possibly work commercially. How many customers would there be for licensing COTS routing-suite when costs are millions annually to develop it for general use-case. -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Eric Kuhnke (Jun 15)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Ca By (Jun 15)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Jennifer Rexford (Jun 16)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Prem Jonnalagadda (Jun 16)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Pavel Odintsov (Jun 15)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Saku Ytti (Jun 16)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Colton Conor (Jun 16)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Peter Phaal (Jun 16)
- Re: Barefoot "Tofino": 6.4 Tbps whitebox switch silicon? Ca By (Jun 15)