[160662] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Saku Ytti)
Mon Feb 11 07:13:27 2013
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:13:06 +0200
From: Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <025f01ce0846$caaad7d0$60008770$@swan.sk>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On (2013-02-11 11:58 +0100), Adam Vitkovsky wrote:
> >The only time real-time per se matters is if you're playing the same content on multiple screens and *synchronization* matters.
> And there's the HFT where "real-time" really does matter :)
I think most of HFT crowd are buying into low-latency more as 'why not'
than as technical necessity.
Reducing latency of your switch from comparable of 200m of fibre (quite
high latency) to 20m (rather low latency) seems to be very big and
important thing. Yet at the same time one of the most relevant exchanges of
them all is replicating multicast on MX trio hardware, which means
unpredictable/unfair, high delay replication, which will completely
abstract out any switch-level micro-optimization you may have gained.
--
++ytti
