[172564] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: MACsec SFP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jonathan Lassoff)
Tue Jun 24 04:16:09 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <53A92FEC.9070206@aimvalley.nl>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 01:16:01 -0700
From: Jonathan Lassoff <jof@thejof.com>
To: Pieter Hulshoff <phulshof@aimvalley.nl>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Pieter Hulshoff <phulshof@aimvalley.nl> wrote:
> On 24-6-2014 8:37, Saku Ytti wrote:
>>
>> On (2014-06-23 11:13 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
>>
>>> feature and market information for such a device, and I would welcome
>>> some
>>> feedback from interested people. Discussion about other types of smart
>>> SFPs
>>> would also be welcome. Feel free to contact me directly using the contact
>>> information below.
>>
>> I'd do questionable things for subrate SFP, SFP which I can put to 1GE
>> port
>> and have 10M and 100M rates available. Or to 10GE port and get 1GE, 100M
>> and
>> 10M
>>
>> Use case is network generation upgrade where you still have one or two
>> 100M
>> ports for MGMT ports etc.
>
>
> I've seen this request from others as well. Do you have any
> proposal/preference to limit the data rate from the switch?
Seems like it would be just like emulating a media convertor. Drop any
frames in excess of 100 Mbit? Perhaps buffer a little bit?
If using the interface for any protocols, configuration might need to
be made to adjust link costs.
