From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Jul 16 19:23:21 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [209.157.86.2])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C98E14F3F
	for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 16 Jul 1999 19:23:18 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com)
Received: (from dillon@localhost)
	by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id TAA25948;
	Fri, 16 Jul 1999 19:20:44 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dillon)
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 19:20:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Message-Id: <199907170220.TAA25948@apollo.backplane.com>
To: Vincent Poy <vince@venus.GAIANET.NET>
Cc: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM>,
	Bill Paul <wpaul@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>,
	crypt0genic <crypt0genic@ecad.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: poor ethernet performance? 
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9907161709060.331-100000@venus.GAIANET.NET>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

:	I know, I'm just wondering how did they get more frequency out of
:wire of the same size.  I can understand it if the wire was a larger
:guage.

    For twisted pair, Less power == less crosstalk.  Plus the higher 
    bandwidth transceivers use better receivers and better pre-attenuation
    of the signal. 

    I'm not sure what the gigabit copper ethernet people are doing, but there
    are other ways as well. 

    Basic ethernet uses baseband which is quite noisy even with the
    preattenuation, so there was lots of room to go faster.

					-Matt



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message