[156808] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: /. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Meuse)
Thu Sep 27 09:56:22 2012
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1209271538020.13902@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:56:01 -0400
From: Steve Meuse <smeuse@mara.org>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
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
