nanog mailing list archives
Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now
From: Steve Meuse <smeuse () mara org>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:56:01 -0400
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>wrote:
I opposed 40GE, but since physics is a lot of the problem here, I think 400GE is favorable over 1TE. Already now we're sitting with platforms with forwarding performance per slot that doesn't really match 100GE nicely, imagine the equivalent problem for 1TE. By the time this is ready, will platforms be at slightly over 1T per slot, perhaps it then makes more sense to have 3x400GE instead of 1x1TE per slot.
1Tb/s per slot is a reality that will be here sooner than many might realize. I think the bonded vs. native argument can come down to optical bandwidth. If you are limited to N number of wavelengths on a segment having faster native interfaces becomes desirable (assuming similar optical bandwidth per unit). -Steve
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)
