From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri May 14 5: 1:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09AFE14CE6 for ; Fri, 14 May 1999 05:01:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.1) id OAA42619; Fri, 14 May 1999 14:01:00 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des) To: Adrian Filipi-Martin Cc: Harold Gutch , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: time for another upgrade? References: From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 14 May 1999 14:00:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: Adrian Filipi-Martin's message of "Fri, 14 May 1999 04:21:38 -0400 (EDT)" Message-ID: Lines: 15 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 19.34 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Adrian Filipi-Martin writes: > I was under the impression that the new machine was on gigabit > ethernet. As you correctly point out it is impossible to do 1TB on 100Mbps > ethernet. In fact you cannot even do the 969GB/day cited in the upgrade > press release. 969*2^30*10/86400 == 120,423,128bps. This agrees with what > the stats pages are reporting today. Why are you counting 10 bits per byte? Ethernet doesn't have start/stop bits. OTOH, I wonder if the Ethernet preamble and trailer have to be subtracted from the 100 Mbps figure... DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message