Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Broadcom Has 200G Ethernet Link Speed Support Coming To Its Driver For Linux 5.10

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MadeUpName
    replied
    One of he reasons we don't have affordable 10G is most people use their phones rather than their computers and are happy to accept low quality media to avoid using a computer. For every thing else around the house they really don't have a need for 10G. Lots of people here don't fit in that category, I know I don't.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by M@GOid View Post
    The problem with that is, above 100 mbit internet is accessible to a lot of people out there
    by "a lot" you mean "less than 1%"? i'm sure they have some selection of 1gbit wan routers. and if they want faster lan, they can connect devices via 2.5/5/10gb switch
    Originally posted by M@GOid View Post
    . Even I got a 120 mbit connection, since my provider is making it their bottom line. And that is in Brazil, which is not a worldwide champion on average internet speeds.
    you are very overestimating worldwide average internet speeds

    Leave a comment:


  • M@GOid
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    yes, router integrates cheap 100mb switch so you can connect several devices to internet. if you want those devices to have fast connection to each other, you connect them via 1gb switch
    The problem with that is, above 100 mbit internet is accessible to a lot of people out there. Even I got a 120 mbit connection, since my provider is making it their bottom line. And that is in Brazil, which is not a worldwide champion on average internet speeds.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
    Not so much in a home setting, where a single multi-purpose device is the norm, integrating a 4+ port switch with a router/firewall and often a wifi access point as well.
    yes, router integrates cheap 100mb switch so you can connect several devices to internet. if you want those devices to have fast connection to each other, you connect them via 1gb switch

    Leave a comment:


  • torsionbar28
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    well, routers are for wan, which is slower than lan
    Not so much in a home setting, where a single multi-purpose device is the norm, integrating a 4+ port switch with a router/firewall and often a wifi access point as well.
    Last edited by torsionbar28; 29 September 2020, 09:02 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • grok
    replied
    Originally posted by zyxxel View Post

    You can always find the exception to the rule. But LAN normally is faster than WAN.

    So I have 1G to the building, but 10G for LAN. And the majority of people with 1G at home has less than 1G WAN. One reason why it's logical with more bandwidth on the LAN is so a computer can make use of max WAN speed and still have good bandwidth for other in-house communication.
    This is logical indeed ; what happens in my market is ISPs have one or two consumer offers so moms and grandmas are signing up for stupidly fast Internet - this is the only option in new constructions, too. The scam instead is you don't get consumer support when it stops working.
    So I'm expecting more of this, as well as more people using cheap 4G/5G because they get one bill and carriers have an incentive to fix their outages.

    Leave a comment:


  • zyxxel
    replied
    Originally posted by grok View Post

    Not so much actually, people are using 802.11n to access their fiber wan so the wan can be 20x/50x faster than the LAN. Another esoteric result is people downloading to a USB drive or SD card - wan speed is greater than the drive's write speed.

    An ISP there released a new router and plan. they claim 5 gigabit wan (I don't know how wrong or true that is) with one 2.5Gb lan port, two 1Gb lan ports and 802.11ax which they claim is 0.5 Gbps. They've always had custom modem/routers - in this case, router only as it only does fiber.
    You can always find the exception to the rule. But LAN normally is faster than WAN.

    So I have 1G to the building, but 10G for LAN. And the majority of people with 1G at home has less than 1G WAN. One reason why it's logical with more bandwidth on the LAN is so a computer can make use of max WAN speed and still have good bandwidth for other in-house communication.

    Leave a comment:


  • grok
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    well, routers are for wan, which is slower than lan
    Not so much actually, people are using 802.11n to access their fiber wan so the wan can be 20x/50x faster than the LAN. Another esoteric result is people downloading to a USB drive or SD card - wan speed is greater than the drive's write speed.

    An ISP there released a new router and plan. they claim 5 gigabit wan (I don't know how wrong or true that is) with one 2.5Gb lan port, two 1Gb lan ports and 802.11ax which they claim is 0.5 Gbps. They've always had custom modem/routers - in this case, router only as it only does fiber.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jabberwocky
    replied
    Originally posted by mb_q View Post
    Cool, but where is our consumer-grade 10G ethernet?
    Single interface solutions have been available for years thanks to aquantia aqc107. Unmanaged switches are still quite expensive. That said Aquantia's Linux support is/was not that great.

    IMO It's the same problem as M.2 vs U.2 consumers and enthusiasts are happy paying flagship prices for suboptimal hardware. Logically it doesn't make sense to fill an ATX (or larger) motherboard with M.2 and regard it as an market-worthy feature. It only makes sense for laptops or tiny computers where consumers pay more for compact storage devices. If majority of consumers hype/demand 10gbe or U.2 then manufacturers will supply them.

    Leave a comment:


  • zyxxel
    replied
    Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
    If the transition to 1G was any indication I wouldn't hold my breath for 10G routers any time soon. Gig-E was ubiquitous in the consumer space with on-board Gbe ports and $50 eight port gigabit switches, *years* before the first home routers with 1G ports became available. Not sure what the delay was about, but home routers were years behind the Gigabit trend. I would expect the same for 10Gbe.
    A 8-port switch for home use just has an ASIC for doing the switching by just caring about the MAC available on each port. Easy and relatively cheap. The router needs to be able to process, firewall and route all data so it has a real processor - and depending on speed that processor needs more or less hardware acceleration to be able to have time to run firewall and routing rules on all the packets. So for a cheap router for home use, it's very much a question of availability of decent processors capable of handling the routing functionality. And right now, that availability is very bad. A common Layerscape processor choice might have one 2.5G, one 1G and a 4x 2.5G switch. And for more ports, the hardware needs to add external networking using PCIe or similar. So hard to make a cheap 10G router for home use.

    This is also the reason why it takes quite some time for cheap managed switches for home use.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X