Here comes 5Gbps networking over standard cables

[pege63]

Here comes 5Gbps networking over standard cables
IEEE has approved the 802.3bz standard: 2.5Gbps over Cat 5e, 5Gbps over Cat 6.

 

[System Error Message]

good news for networking geeks but bad news for most users. Windows hardware support is bleak. A lot of things dont work on windows which is why i suffer everytime i do large transfers between my file server over gigabit LAN. My file server runs opensuse and uses 10Gb/s NIC. My desktop runs windows 7 and uses the dual onboard NICs but only one can be used at a time. Trying to use the 10Gb/s NICs was pointless as windows rejected it.

Trying to install AMD GPU on windows server 2012 was a total failure as everytime i tried to install it the entire system froze.

So those of us who live at homes wont be able to afford the new NICs that are expected to come out that support this new standard. You can get 2nd hand quad port intel server NICs cheap and 2nd hand 10Gb/s NICs cheap too but when 2.5Gb/s and 5Gb/s come out they are going to cost more than a 2nd hand 10Gb/s NIC. Switch costs will be another problem too, will there be a netgear prosafe 24 port with 5Gb/s for the same price as the 1Gb/s version out now?

 

[W4RH34D]

You can use one of those quad intel nics as a link aggregate and get 4 gbs right now.

 

[thiggins]

You can use one of those quad intel nics as a link aggregate and get 4 Gbps right now.

Not for an individual client.

 

[W4RH34D]

Not for an individual client.

Oh for windows - yeah. OSX no problem.

 

[L&LD]

Oh for windows - yeah. OSX no problem.

LACP works differently in Windows than osx?

 

[W4RH34D]

LACP works differently in Windows than osx?

In MacOS you can team ports together natively.

 

[L&LD]

In MacOS you can team ports together natively.

And that changes how LACP works? For a single client, I think they'll still only get 1Gbps maximum rates. Even in osx.

 

[System Error Message]

in windows server you can do LACP but the main problem is what the majority of users use. So the people who stand to benefit from this might not be able to afford it. As the news says, its only a difference in modulation, frequency so it looks like a drop in replacement for the current 1Gb/s ethernet that can negotiate at 2.5Gb/s or 5Gb/s. Shouldnt need to cost more than 1Gb/s ethernet as the technology isnt as expensive or demanding like 10Gb/s networking but you can bet that the industry is going to charge through the roof for this new technology.

 

[W4RH34D]

And that changes how LACP works? For a single client, I think they'll still only get 1Gbps maximum rates. Even in osx.

Nah, I have had it enabled and it was crazy fast. I'll take my first hand experience over your condescending tone. I bet a lot of cool things don't happen for you with that kind of crap.

If only there was some sort of file distribution protocol that could send files to a machine from other machines that had that data in almost a torrent like fashion.

 

[sfx2000]

LACP works differently in Windows than osx?

OSX does a very decent job, and it's easy to set up - and on some machines, with Thunderbolt, it's very easy... (and cheap, as a thunderbolt to GiGe adapter is 29 bucks, and it's fast as hell under MacOS) -

Oddly enough, one can bind WiFi/USB-100Mb/Onboard GiGe/Thunderbolt/Firewire/bluetooth interfaces all together - which presents a different problem perhaps... a surplus of choices, lol...

For Windows, it's a bit more work -- Pro/Enterprise clients are easier here, but all Windows is Windows, so sometimes it's a deep dive into the registry...

 

[L&LD]

Nah, I have had it enabled and it was crazy fast. I'll take my first hand experience over your condescending tone. I bet a lot of cool things don't happen for you with that kind of crap.

I don't understand your attitude? I ask a question and that makes me have a condescending tone?

Anyone? Does LACP work differently in osx than in Windows? What I know right now is that any particular client will only have 1Gbps throughput possible from any other machine that is also using multiple ports on the same network.

Sorry, but 'crazy fast' hasn't convinced me. As none of the other 'magical' things Apple is known for have either.

 

[System Error Message]

I was reading about LACP and configuring it on windows server. Theres 1 mode that configures it on the switch and other modes such as static with hashing. Its important that you read about the type of LACP you use and what you can do with it. Some modes allow distributing a single TCP stream over multiple links so you wouldnt need to send a file in a distributed fashion like torrents. It does have its disadvantages in that it tolerates different speed links less.

 

[VisionxOrb]

Not for an individual client.

Doesnt SMB 3.0 in windows 8 and up fix that problem?

 

[KenZ71]

I'll go with a quick & unsophisticated analysis:

Microsoft's main goal is to make money, yup call me captain obvious.

When they decide their is a demand for faster networking you can bet they will find a way to release a new version AND market it in such way people don't buy food so they can buy this fancy new stuff.

 

[thiggins]

Not helpful, Ken.

If anyone has FACT on the subject, preferably backed by reference documentation please share it. Here is what I have.

Windows 10 is not required to team multiple NICs. Intel's NIC driver/utility has been able to team multiple NICs since at least Windows 7.

SMB 3.0 supports SMB Multichannel. This has been reported to work on 10GbE NICs with no configuration required. SMB 3.0 support was added to Windows 8.1. There are specific NIC requirements for SMB multichannel.

There is a simple way to see if you can get higher bandwidth from a single client using multiple NICS. Just do two (or more) simultaneous large file copies and sum the throughput reported. If your OS doesn't report file copy throughput, time a single filte transfer, then time the two transfers.

 

[VisionxOrb]

If anyone is interested in reading the saga intel is having right now with trying to get there teaming working under windows 10, look here
https://communities.intel.com/thread/77934

its at 20 pages already.