Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 20:47:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom <tom@uniserve.com> To: Scott Michel <scottm@cs.ucla.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Intel PRO/1000 Gigabit Adapter Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980821204259.10110C-100000@shell.uniserve.ca> In-Reply-To: <199808220111.SAA23303@mordred.cs.ucla.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 21 Aug 1998, Scott Michel wrote: > [slightly off topic] > > Ewwwwwwwww! Friends never let friends build networks with ATM unless > absolutely necessary and even then ... It'd be like perpetrating an > MS Operating system on someone. If the network can't support mcast > naturally, should we really be using it? More important to me, is the ATM overhead of 10 to 15%. On a 155mbs OC3 link, 10 to 20mbs is wasted! You can justify ATM overhead for mixed applications, but if you just want to push IP traffic around, you'd better off using clear channel routed links. > The good news is that ATM is being relegated to the dust heap of > history now that PPP/Packet over Sonet is operational. All we need > now is operational PCI bus cards. Yep. I wonder if AGP slots can be used for non-video applications? AGP has about 4 times the bandwidth of PCI. Of course, you can only have on such adapter. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980821204259.10110C-100000>