Point to Point Ethernet

Tomas L. Byrnes tomb at byrneit.net
Thu Jul 9 01:51:05 CDT 2009


Overhead shmoverhead. 

Seriously, we're fighting over the non-issue. It's not the "wasted"
0.02% of bandwidth (@ 1Gbps) that's the issue. It's the utility of a
"come as you are" "plug and play" network that "Ethernet" (which really
loosely means all IEEE 802 protocols) provides, which the current
carrier networks do not. 

If I read the thread correctly, what you really are asking for is the
ability to plug your IEEE compliant gig/10gig switch into a carrier port
and just have it ARP and respond for valid IP addresses on the segment,
as opposed to all the back and forth provisioning, truck rolls, and
interaction with bell-head union workers that the current system
requires.

Now, HOW to accomplish that is an interesting discussion, and the first
valid result will probably be a great business.

That doesn't require breaking Ethernet, using promiscuous mode, or much
except the carriers stopping trying to throw their legacy
circuit-switched requirements onto a packet switched network.

There's plenty of fiber in the ground. Light dark stuff with the new
network, plug it into IEEE 802* compliant layer 2, and IETF compliant
layer 3 infrastructure; and leave the dying Bellcore/ITU network on the
old copper and SONET.


>-----Original Message-----
>From: sthaug at nethelp.no [mailto:sthaug at nethelp.no]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 11:34 PM
>To: tkapela at gmail.com
>Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Point to Point Ethernet
>
>> Best case, you blow 12 bytes on IFG in gig, 20 bytes on
fast-e/slow-e.
>
>As far as I know Gig and 10 Gig (with LAN PHY) are exactly the same
>as 10 and 100 Mbps in this respect, i.e. 8 bytes of preamble and 12
>bytes of IFG. So you always have an overhead of 20 bytes, no matter
>what.
>
>10 Gig with WAN PHY is a whole different ballgame, of course.
>
>Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no





More information about the NANOG mailing list