Mx204 alternative

Tue Sep 3 02:48:34 UTC 2019

I'd like to register my interest as well. I think an open hardware platform
will do a lot to move the industry forward.

On Mon, Sep 2, 2019, 10:09 PM Brandon Martin <lists.nanog at monmotha.net>
wrote:

> On 9/2/19 6:04 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> >> Like how about 8-16*100GE single Trio PCI card with no-questions
> >> asked, specification released, would there be a market? I like to
> >> think there would be.
> > I'd be down for this.
> >
> > Mark.
>
> Oh my gosh this.  Especially if the docs are truly public (i.e.
> available with single click-wrap "don't be an asshat" license or even
> something like GDFL) and not just under NDA, but honestly even if it's
> an NDA required as long as it's broadly available for issuance (no need
> to be a high-volume) Broadcom partner and allows the results of its use
> to be distributed as F/OSS software, I'm game.
>
> I kinda wonder if the culture at Broadcom has changed any since the
> merger/acquisition with Avagao.  Obviously in ye olde days, you wouldn't
> even get the time of day from them unless you were wanting to commit to
> a million or so in sales.
>
> I spread my interest (and professional practice) between SP networking,
> industrial networking, industrial controls, and industrial computing
> including hardware, so this is drool-level interest for me even if I
> don't get to work on it directly.  So much so that I've been wanting to
> play with an FPGA platform for this sort of thing, but there's just no
> compelling reason given that existing, openly-documented accelerated
> NICs from e.g. Intel on high-end PC hardware can basically match the
> performance of any reasonable-cost FPGA Ethernet switching system in
> useful workloads.
> --
> Brandon Martin
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20190902/06e2f903/attachment.html>