7 ms·
I'm using the sonnet at work. Work paid for it. Yes it's more expensive. I have gotten over 25 gbps bidirectional, but not by much. Maybe 27. A big downside is
by Neywiny 3mo ago
I'm using the sonnet at work. Work paid for it. Yes it's more expensive. I have gotten over 25 gbps bidirectional, but not by much. Maybe 27. A big downside is that it only supports 15W upstream power which I didn't think to check, so since that laptop only has 2 usb-c ports for power input, it's a bit limiting.
The upside, though, was that I plugged it in, got my throughput, and never had to worry ever again. Remember that engineering time is mucho $$. So troubleshooting overheating, divising a solution, manufacturing it, etc, that all eats into the savings.
The $400 dock would be cool though. It seems smaller than the sonnet and fixes my charging problem. Weirdly I didn't think I'd care about not including transceivers but they did actually come in handy, so that is a downside. Might try to get one of these if I need another one in the future.
- voxadam 3mo ago>I'm using the sonnet at work. I initially read this as SONET[1] and was seriously questioning your technical choices. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_optical_networking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_optical_networking
- danw1979 3mo agohey. hey. not everyone’s on board with this packet switching fad, buster. what a man does in his own homelab, even if it does involve ATM, is none of our business.
- pyvpx 3mo agoYou cell switching cretins are still around?! Back under your rock!! Shoo, shooo!
- wolvoleo 3mo agoATM was packet switched :) SDH was circuit based.
- danw1979 3mo agoI don’t want to split hairs here, but you started it … :) It was 53-byte “cell” switched, but used virtual circuits as a path through the network. The data plane had no globally routable address in the cell header. I don’t think most people considered it a “packet” network, and being an ITU standard it definitely belonged on that incumbent, connection-oriented, telco side side of the protocol wars. Whatever anyway, it was weird.
- wolvoleo 3mo agoYou're right. I oversimplified. However when I worked with SDH it was particularly popular because some customers like banks vetoed ATM because they were incredibly worried one of their packets would make its way to a third party. At that time encryption was not yet commonplace. I always thought that risk was a bit overblown but they were adamant. SDH was more like a software switched multiplexing (where the previous generation PDH had this in hardware). And it was not exposed to the customer, they just got a symmetric feed of 2mbps or a multiple thereof. Still, technically the same could happen if we configured it wrong. But for some reason the banks were less worried about it. But yes it was not packet by packet switched no. I have to admit my knowledge of ATM was never the best as I worked exclusively on the SDH network.
- walrus01 3mo agoI've seen some very old cubicle setups that had two strands of 62.5/125 multimode (OM1) pulled to each desk for a FDDI connection. Very costly in its era.
- LargoLasskhyfv 3mo agoYou don't say. That rang some bells, working in a communal data-centre, serving all of town, and smaller neighbouring towns. At 100Mb/s. Funny thing was the town still used many terminals in its offices. Serial Siemens terminals, speaking to Siemens RM400, RM600 and something called BS2000, also by Siemens. Of course with baudrates, parity, even/odd, start&stop bits nobody else would have used. Because Siemens... So how do you connect them? By using adapters not much bigger than a matchbox, somehow powered by the serial port! At insane prices per piece, more than the terminal itself. Shrug? Vee arr government, vee don't need to care about zat!1!! (Town is broke by now, btw.) Similar things in all police stations of that state. (Many more towns, counties, cities broke there, too.) Reasoning for using FDDI was that there existed equipment (by Allied Telesis IIRC) which could detect someone messing with the fibre somewhere, out of sight. Not that much later, in the German HQ of some larger insurance company, I had the privilige of playing with FDDI at 1Gb/s. And witness the oh so unbreakable IBM S390(or was it still 370 at the time?) go down hard, several times... Hrrm. What else did I witness? Oh, some Compaq thing made for a rack, 4 units high, sitting on a desk without cover, making you feel like you'd be in a vacuumer, or right next to an airport. Whooooouuuuiiiiieeeehissssss! That thing ran Novell Netware, responsible for every login from any client across all offices in town. Handled by a full-length ISA-Card, full eight bits wide! Not 16. Not using the EISA-slots...(facepalm)
- icedchai 3mo agoAlmost 30 years ago, I worked on a corporate campus with several different buildings spread out over about 5 miles. There was a SONET ring linking them. I remember a coworker showing me this add-drop multiplexer thing so he could provision a fractional T1 of bandwidth out of the ring. CSU/DSUs, thick serial cables, cisco 2501 routers... We'd laugh at these speeds today.
- itopaloglu83 3mo agoAsking out of curiosity because I always wanted but never needed such speeds, could you elaborate on what you do and how does this speed help you? And I presume there’s a reason you’re not able to connect directly to the drives etc. with thunderbolt.
- Neywiny 3mo agoI'm not connecting to drives. What I'm connecting to has that speed of interface. And I think that's all I can say about that.