3 ms·
"Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article "When we set the upper limit of PC-DOS at 640K, we thought
by bell-cot 7mo ago
"Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article
"When we set the upper limit of PC-DOS at 640K, we thought nobody would ever need that much memory." - Bill Gates
- WhyNotHugo 7mo agoHonestly, I'm really curious about this number. 10bits is 1024, so why 999G specifically?
- elevation 7mo agoLooks like an arbitrary validation cap. By the time we're maxing out the 64-bit underlying representation we probably won't be using Ethernet any more.
- palmotea 7mo ago> By the time we're maxing out the 64-bit underlying representation we probably won't be using Ethernet any more. We will be using Ethernet until the heat death of the universe, if we survive that long.
- bell-cot 7mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet#History (& following sections) Calling something "Ethernet" amounts to a promise that: - From far enough up the OSI sandwich*, you can pretend that it's a magically-faster version of old-fashioned Ethernet - It sticks to broadly accepted standards, so you won't get bitten by cutting-edge or proprietary surprises *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model
- abound 7mo agoLooking at the patch itself (linked in the article), the description has this: > We now support configuring bandwidth up to ~1 Tbps (overflow in m2sm at m > 2^40). So I think that's it, 2^40 is ~1.099 trillion
- throw0101d 7mo ago> "Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article Especially given that IEEE 802.3dj is working on 1.6T / 1600G, and is expected to publish the final spec in Summer/Autumn 2026: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terabit_Ethernet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terabit_Ethernet Currently these interfaces are only on switches, but there are already NICs at 800G (P1800GO, Thor Ultra, ConnectX-8/9), so if you LACP/LAGG two together your bond is at 1600G.
- arsome 7mo agoIf you're moving those kind of speeds you're probably not doing packet filtering in software.
- throw0101d 7mo agoBut you may be using Unix-y software to manage the interfaces and do offload programming: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_Packet_Processing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_Packet_Processing * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptm9h-Lf0gg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptm9h-Lf0gg ("VPP: A 1Tbps+ router with a single IPv4 address") * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulus_Networks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulus_Networks
- himata4113 7mo agoI use VPP and handle bonded speeds of 200gbit. Not that far fetched to also do this at 1000gbit.
- mulmen 7mo agoProbably? But if you are then you’re certainly not using OpenBSD.
- bitfilped 7mo agoYes, we're already running 800G networks, so this phrasing seems really silly to me.