/. Terabit Ethernet is Dead, for Now

jim deleskie deleskie at gmail.com
Thu Sep 27 13:26:39 UTC 2012


  That problem IMO will only be worse with a 4x speed multiplier over
100G what premium will anyone be willing to spend to have a single
400G pipe over 4 bonded 100G pipes?

-jim

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Jared Mauch <jared at puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> On Sep 27, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Darius Jahandarie <djahandarie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I recall 40Gbit/s Ethernet being promoted heavily for similar reasons
>> as the ones in this article, but then 100Gbit/s being the technology
>> that actually ended up in most places. Could this be the same thing
>> happening?
>
> I would say yes, except for the physics involved here.  Getting the signal done optically is the "easy" part.
>
> I'm not concerned if the next step after 100 is 400.  It's in the right direction and a fair multiple.  There is also a problem in the 100GbE space where the market pricing hasn't yet reached an amount whereby the economics are "close enough" to push people beyond N*10G.
>
> - Jared



More information about the NANOG mailing list