nanog mailing list archives
Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 19:24:55 +0900
Jared Mauch wrote:
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.
The problem is that physical layer of 100GE (with 10*10G) and 10*10GE are identical (if same plug and cable are used both for 100GE and 10*10GE). Both 100GE and 10*10GE use trunking. The difference is whether trunking is done below (100GE) or above (10*10GE) L2 framing. While 100GE has lower HOL delay (though already negligible with 10GE), 10*10GE is more flexible. Still, for 100GE, under some circumstances, 100GE with 4*25G may become less expensive than 10*10GE. But, as it is unlikely that 1TE will be 4*250G or 400GE will be 2*200G, faster Ethernet has little, if any, economical merit. Masataka Ohta
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)