Ultra Ethernet Consortium Started By LF, Intel, AMD, Meta, HPE & Others

[brad0]

You didn't get the reference @NotMine999 did... its okay.

I did get the reference. That applies to some things, but not here.

[zexelon]

I remember, in 2007, being laughed at by all the experts for suggestion network companies like Cisco and Juiper run their cheaper offerings on linux to get it field tested and possibly bring their proces down somewhat (or make more profit!)

So Cisco changed in 2013. Glad to see I was right!

Anyone know if Ubiquiti run their gear on a linux stack?

The Ubiquiti ER4 runs on a Linux stack. I have set up several of them now and they are an odd stopgap of really low end "commercial grade" or quite high end "pro-sumer" grade. Their not to bad but not to great either.

[brad0]

The Ubiquiti ER4 runs on a Linux stack. I have set up several of them now and they are an odd stopgap of really low end "commercial grade" or quite high end "pro-sumer" grade. Their not to bad but not to great either.

Prosumer grade at best that is overhyped. Leaves a lot to be desired. Definitely not Enterprise grade even though a lot push it as such.

[zexelon]

Prosumer grade at best that is overhyped. Leaves a lot to be desired. Definitely not Enterprise grade even though a lot push it as such.

I will agree with you on this. I have set up several of them in small enterprise and data center applications. They have worked well enough so far in these setups, but they are really nothing like a Cisco.... but you also don't pay anywhere close to Cisco prices.

Basically my personal view is they are "fit for service" ... as long as you know the hype is way over the top and they are not at all "enterprise grade". Also to put it out there... Ubiquiti's support sucks. Assume you are going to be hacking together a solution on your own with their hardware.

[brad0]

I will agree with you on this. I have set up several of them in small enterprise and data center applications. They have worked well enough so far in these setups, but they are really nothing like a Cisco.... but you also don't pay anywhere close to Cisco prices.

Basically my personal view is they are "fit for service" ... as long as you know the hype is way over the top and they are not at all "enterprise grade". Also to put it out there... Ubiquiti's support sucks. Assume you are going to be hacking together a solution on your own with their hardware.

The problem is there is no middle ground. It's either cheap low end gear with software development practices that leaves a lot to be desired and basically no support or paying 3 times as much. But too many industries work like this. I would have no problem paying in the middle for a vendor that can provide a good software development practices and has half decent support.

[zexelon]

The problem is there is no middle ground. It's either cheap low end gear with software development practices that leaves a lot to be desired and basically no support or paying 3 times as much. But too many industries work like this. I would have no problem paying in the middle for a vendor that can provide a good software development practices and has half decent support.

YES! I have found that the middle ground these days seems to be self invented over and over again. You want something better then cheap overseas but dont need Cisco "carrier grade" you basically have to go build it yourself.

Its pretty cool that you can, especially between Linux and *BSD based solutions these days... but none of them our "supported" (commercially) and somewhere along the line they are ductaped together. Its great to get up and running but good luck building it so the next person can take it over!

Any idea why there is no middle ground?

[stormcrow]

apparently Netflix-like traffic is not the main target of that standard.

According to their FAQ: "Deliver a complete architecture that optimizes Ethernet for high performance AI and HPC networking", and Linux is king in that area.

I read that, too. But it won't change that it will be used for other interconnects, not just AI and HPC. My point is that the assertion that Linux is the only high bandwidth OS is provably false.

I also find it irritating that all of this gold rush for fundamentally broken ML models is going to end up costing the environment far more damage than cryptocurrencies ever did or will. I can just hope that all this waste on AI bubbles will end up benefiting other more useful markets even as data centers drive water shortages in places they never should have been built in the first place.

F.Ultra Thanks. I'd forgotten that switch over. However, the point about FreeBSD & JUNOS remains. FreeBSD is used a great deal for serving high bandwidth data streams. It's just not as heavily publicized. Linux is as much a marketing buzzword these days as the utterly mislabeled "artificial intelligence" systems currently marketed. It ticks a fad box, along with "open source", "privacy", "diversity", and "secure". Usually all of which are just lip service tags.

[rogerx]

ChatGPT

Me: Are you the second coming of Jesus Christ?

ChatGPT: No, I am not the second coming of Jesus Christ. I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful information and assistance to users.

Me: Are you the anti-Christ?

ChatGPT: No, I am not the anti-Christ either. I am a computer program created to assist users by providing information and answering questions to the best of my abilities.


... I'm not impressed.

[writequit]

Ya, Cisco is the only game in town. smh.

Did anyone say they were?

[CochainComplex]

"Puts the newest and best crafted tinfoil hat on"

Best tinfoil introduction i hvae ever heard.