Can I build a home network faster than 1 gigabit?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Can I build a home network faster than 1 gigabit?

Captain Foo: May 11, 2004; we vibin'
we slidin'
we breathin'
we dyin'

doomisland posted:

10Gbe copper is gross and won't actually hit 10Gb after the cable is longer than a few meters I believe.

only with 6, 6A/7 should let you do what you need.

# ¿ May 26, 2014 21:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 26, 2024 05:22

Captain Foo: May 11, 2004; we vibin'
we slidin'
we breathin'
we dyin'

Approved optics has real good prices and I've never had a compatibility issue, though I think I've only used them for sfp not sfp+

# ¿ May 27, 2014 17:37

Captain Foo: May 11, 2004; we vibin'
we slidin'
we breathin'
we dyin'

revmoo posted:

Looks like you can get bulk SFP 4gig modules at a pretty good price. If you could track down a few blank SFP NICs on the cheap this might be possible for less than a couple hundred. Dunno where to find blank SFP adapters though, they all seem to come with modules included.

EDIT: I was able to find on eBay 16 4gig modules and a 8-port switch filled with 2gig modules for less than 50 bucks total. Seems like that + a couple cheapish single-port NICs would be enough. Wonder what the cable costs are. I've got a 75 meter run and a 10 meter run I'd need to do.

EDIT2: After doing more reading I'm wondering if it's even possible to just plug in faster SFP modules into a switch or if the switch needs to have some type of support for that module? Are they plug-and-play?

depends on the switch, read the datasheets for your piece of gear

# ¿ Jun 5, 2014 02:47

Captain Foo: May 11, 2004; we vibin'
we slidin'
we breathin'
we dyin'

Alereon posted:

You could do 10G SFP+ Direct Attach for a home network since runs are <10m, right? I've always used up to 25ft Ethernet cables for my setups. Of course you still need to pay for a switch and NICs, and I guess the cables become a non-trivial expense after a certain point, but you don't need to pay for SFP+ modules. This also lets you buy an SFP+ module if you need a longer run or compatibility with hardware that doesn't support Direct Attach.

SFP+ Direct Attach gives me something of a nerdboner, it's just hilarious that we made a socket for modular transceivers, and then were like "wait, why do we need transceivers again?" and just hooked the sockets together with a cable, letting them talk to eachother directly using the protocol originally designed for the socket to talk to the transceiver.

I didn't know about this but it's hilarious

# ¿ Jul 3, 2014 19:33

Captain Foo: May 11, 2004; we vibin'
we slidin'
we breathin'
we dyin'

Alereon posted:

I just upgraded my LAN wiring to CAT7 so I'll be ready when 10GBASE-T adapters come down in price Sure the actual reason was that CAT7 wasn't much more expensive and STP holds up better mechanically when installed improperly, but still

# ¿ Sep 21, 2014 20:03

Captain Foo: May 11, 2004; we vibin'
we slidin'
we breathin'
we dyin'

KillHour posted:

It's all about latency, bro.

First, you need one of these:

http://www.digilentinc.com/Products/Detail.cfm?NavPath=2,400,1228&Prod=NETFPGA-1G-CML

Then you're gonna want to write your own network stack. Why? Latency. You don't need no TCP; UDP for everything! If you're waiting for ACKs, you're wasting precious microseconds. Flow control? gently caress no. You don't want none of that poo poo. Do you really need auto negotiation? When would you not use full duplex? I mean, poo poo. Wait, you have crossover cables, right? Cause I disabled auto MDI-X. No? Well, we can just flip the pins around on the FPGA. No biggie. Backwards compatibility is for suckas. Hell, rip out all that encryption bullshit while you're in there. I mean, why not? That poo poo takes like 5 microseconds on an FPGA to encode and decode! Time is money and the NSA probably already broke SSL anyways. Actually, you should probably just rewrite your ~~buggy financial program~~ game in assembly and have it talk directly at layer 3. I mean, do you really need to deal with that session bullshit? Only one thing's running on that box - and it's running on bare metal. Wait, make it layer 2 - MAC resolution takes too long and there ain't gonna be no routes where we're headed, pal.

Then, you gotta disable spanning tree on your switches. That poo poo takes up packets, rear end in a top hat. Did I say switches? I meant switch. One big fuckoff switch for everything. Good. Now, hardcode the MAC table on the switch. Don't want any broadcasts on this network. gently caress, it's still too slow. You have like 250 feet of cable between your box and the server. Can you get closer? How much closer? Dude, I dunno. Like, can you get on the exchange floor? No? How about like a foot away? 10 million bucks? It's worth it - you're gonna make mad bank, I'm tellin' you. poo poo, it's still too far. What if we untwisted the cable pairs? That would save us like 3% on the cable length. Yeah, it will increase interference, but you're so close it's not like you're gonna get that many flipped bits. And the server will drop anything outside of normal parameters. What do you mean "what if it doesn't catch it?" Of course it will catch it! It's the loving NASDAQ. It's gonna catch it, alright? You'll probably be fine. Just sign here for delivery.

oh my god

# ¿ Oct 18, 2014 15:48

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 26, 2024 05:22

Captain Foo: May 11, 2004; we vibin'
we slidin'
we breathin'
we dyin'

Misogynist posted:

Spread Networks dug a trench directly through the mountains between New York and Chicago to lay fiber between the exchanges a few years ago. It shaves 100 miles and 3ms off the previous shortest path between exchanges.

Flash boys was a good book

# ¿ Oct 22, 2014 01:47

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Can I build a home network faster than 1 gigabit?