A disquisition into the sadly slovenly takeup of 10GBASE-T (2012)
sprezzatech.com
sprezzatech.com
> LDPC FEC coding [2048,1723], with the parity check matrix construction based on a generalized Reed–Solomon [32,2,31] code over GF(26).
> Tomlinson-Harashima precoding (THP)
Pretty sure that’s not true anymore, and with workloads moving to cloud, there’s probably no investment/scale.
With SFP+ hardware we had coax DAC for cheap connections, precut cheap fiber with hardwired transceivers, and of course expensive transceivers for longer range connections on fiber, and we could mix and match.
A 10Gbase-T device meant we had to build the entire segment for new type of wiring, ensuring right NICs and switches, because mixing 10Gbase-T with SFP+ always required expensive transceivers (they were also not trivial to acquire in 2016, speaking from experience trying to unfuck a purchase of Nexus 3k in 10Gbase-T variant when all servers had SFP+)
What I want is 10GBASE-T and wifi 6E and the performance to route 1gbit/s with QoS and I would like it for something more like $200 or less. $250 for a couple of 2.5gbit/s ports on a switch is just not worth it.
CSS610-8G-2S+IN Eight 1G Ethernet ports and two SFP+ ports for 10G fiber connectivity. $99.00
In one device? You want too much for too less, each one separately costs ~$200. And there is no demand for such devices yet which is the reason you can't find it.
"Returnal", about a year older and a much shorter game, is the next largest at 60 GB.
Toward the bottom of the list are "Maneater" and "Life Is Strange: True Colors", both clocking in at about 15GB and as many hours of gameplay.
Having said that, your net connect isn't going to help with games. I have Starlink, which generally sits in the 150-250Mbit range. That should have taken about an hour to download 88GB. It took 7. The CDNs for game delivery aren't exactly speedy. (And that's pretty common, in my experience. Even in my last place when I had gigabit fiber, I generally left the console downloading overnight.)
20+ years later, laptops have 40Gb Thunderbolt and 10Gb USB, but Thunderbolt or USB to 10Gb Ethernet interfaces are still expensive, though 5Gb and 2.5Gb seem to be becoming cheaper and more common. And even a basic, unmanaged 5-port (e.g. TP-Link) 10G/5G/2.5Gb Ethernet switch is still something like $300.
That being said, it's a good idea to do one of two things:
1. Run some fiber to a centrally-located faceplate in each space, with MT-RJ jacks (or something else, like LC).
2. Run a conduit (an inner duct) to each office/lab space, with a pull tape, so that fiber can be easily pulled through in the future.
I personally prefer #2, for reasons like this: We have a few buildings with fiber run into offices/labs, but the fiber run was multimode. That's fine if you want to connect to a switch in the floor or building network closet, but it's not going to be compatible with the inter-building fiber, which is all singlemode.
For extremely large files it makes a large difference but otherwise I haven’t seen any difference at all.
The network card is more expensive, it generates more heat and uses more electricity. I pretty much regret spending the money to upgrade.
Why make an app/service efficiently use 10Mbps if everyone has 1Gbps, for example?
Also, in the cloud, you're often not given sustained 10 Gbps, because e.g. the box with your VM runs 32 guests and only has a 40 Gbps link.
I had a 10GBASE-T network for a while but returned to 1G and haven’t really missed it. It only made a difference during sustained reads/writes from the NAS, and my workflow almost never gets blocked on that. The switches and even Ethernet cards are power hungry and, unless you’re careful about switch selection, can be noisy. It just wasn’t worth it for me.
It's not what I saw a bit more than a year ago when I changed my PC. A PCI express card was about 100€, about the same for a switch IIRC. It was about 500€ total for what I wanted to do, not worth it for me.
The same hardware just Ethernet would have cost 5 or 6 times less!
Even if I wanted to upgrade it means replacing/upgrading my switch, router, and wiring in some cases. Going from Fast Ethernet to 1G was a no brainer and relatively inexpensive. For home use 10G is just too rich for my blood and won't get me much better actual network performance.
Switches with one, maybe two high speed uplink ports used to be quite common, allowing every machine on the switch to get around 50% utilization of their network connection before congestion set in.
The designs are just a generation ahead in everything, and they are really pulling close to 1g theoretical maximum.
It is strange when some Nordic countries are already getting affordable 2.5 to 10Gbps Internet.
Were I to guess, I'd say it's probably due to internet speeds in the US taking forever to get up to 1Gbps. There's little reason to push out consumer switches faster than 1Gbps when the inbound internet connection only goes up 100Mbps.
To add a 3rd more minor reason: for the prosumers DACs/fiber is faster, cheaper, and uses less power. The only reason to go to 10GBASE-T is for cases with existing cabling where 2.5G/5G might make a lot more sense if you don't absolutely need 10G. For everything else go 10G/25G passive DAC or fiber.
802.11ax can go >10gbps without needing any fixed infrastructure. 10GBASE-T is basically abandonware now, at least for consumer applications.
For servers, fiber is even more scalable (25/50/100/400G), and about as easy to handle.
Not quite >10 Gbps on 802.11ax though - standards compliant gear has a max theoretical cap of 9.61 Gbps half duplex using 8 spatial streams and 2.4 Gbps half duplex if one end is any current client chip which is limited to 2 spatial streams. Realistic numbers a little lower, I can get ~2 Gbps goodput on an AX210 in the same room as the router on an empty 160 MHz channel. Still far more than any home consumer will need but it's a bit of a ways off of obsoleting wired 10 Gbps full duplex throughput, especially with the cost of 2 8x8 APs.
Xfinity sells 1.2gbps (used to be 1gbps) and 3gbps (used to be 2gbps) to homes, but the upload speeds are horrible. At&t with its fiber offerings just announced 5gbps speeds, but they're very expensive and have horrible practices that prevent you from using anything but their router.
The main reason we try to bypass AT&T's router is because their NAT table is capped to accept 2048 entries and starts dropping sessions after it reaches the limit. This is why I stated that the web UI method you mentioned is not a true bypass.
The gist is that you'll have two ethernet ports dedicated to AT&T, one for the ONT, and one for the gateway router (which needs to have the gateway's mac address). The pfSense interfaces have to be setup a specific way. There is also a script that has to run while pfSense boots. Once it boots, you can pretty much turn off the gateway and put it away. The only time you'd need to reconnect it is if your ONT loses power.
I hope that helps.
I'm thinking about using JTAG or something to extract the key, because I'd much prefer having everything handled by my own server.
I'd still be happy to pay AT&T the monthly rental for their modem and for the privilege of leaving me alone :)
https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/#/provider-detail?version=dec20...
Bell in other parts of Canada is starting to offer XGPON service (up to 10 Gbps) with a unit that has an integrated ONT, so bypass gets trickier.
My read is that we are in a bubble where some of the 8 Fallacies of Distributed Systems don't have all of their teeth because, while none of the Fallacies are specifically about noisy neighbors, several of them are decidedly informed by them. If I can't outshout you on the network, then you can be forgiven for ignoring the consequences of network congestion. If we figure out how to saturate a 10GB link between two threads running on different machines, then there will suddenly be a lot of remakes of old lectures.
Upgrading clients to 10 ends up being quite expensive though so will have a mixed network. Plus some form factors don't have pcie slots available