nanog mailing list archives
Re: MACsec SFP
From: Jonathan Lassoff <jof () thejof com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 01:16:01 -0700
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Pieter Hulshoff <phulshof () aimvalley nl> wrote:
On 24-6-2014 8:37, Saku Ytti wrote:On (2014-06-23 11:13 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:feature and market information for such a device, and I would welcome some feedback from interested people. Discussion about other types of smart SFPs would also be welcome. Feel free to contact me directly using the contact information below.I'd do questionable things for subrate SFP, SFP which I can put to 1GE port and have 10M and 100M rates available. Or to 10GE port and get 1GE, 100M and 10M Use case is network generation upgrade where you still have one or two 100M ports for MGMT ports etc.I've seen this request from others as well. Do you have any proposal/preference to limit the data rate from the switch?
Seems like it would be just like emulating a media convertor. Drop any frames in excess of 100 Mbit? Perhaps buffer a little bit? If using the interface for any protocols, configuration might need to be made to adjust link costs.
Current thread:
- MACsec SFP Pieter Hulshoff (Jun 23)
- Re: MACsec SFP Saku Ytti (Jun 23)
- Re: MACsec SFP Andreas Larsen (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Pieter Hulshoff (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Jonathan Lassoff (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Saku Ytti (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Pieter Hulshoff (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Saku Ytti (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Pieter Hulshoff (Jun 24)
- RE: MACsec SFP Frank Bulk (iname.com) (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Saku Ytti (Jun 23)
- Re: MACsec SFP Christopher Morrow (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Pieter Hulshoff (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Christopher Morrow (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Saku Ytti (Jun 24)
- Re: MACsec SFP Christopher Morrow (Jun 24)