this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
13 points (93.3% liked)

Technology

59457 readers
3512 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Here we go again. Some big hyperscalers and cloud builders and their ASIC and switch suppliers are unhappy about Ethernet, and rather than wait...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] drdabbles@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The Ultra Ethernet consortium work is interesting to me, but I'm still on the fence about some of the design intentions or at least considerations. One of the major bullet points they list on their introductory white paper is that they want whatever UltraEthernet becomes to be reverse compatible with standard Ethernet. IMO, if you're going to go through the pain of addressing the entire protocol stack from PHY up to application level, then you might as well rip the bandage off all at once.

These massive scale networks that suffer from Ethernet's "inefficiencies" aren't likely to deploy a mixed environment. They're much more likely to build an entirely new environment, decommission an old environment, and build another new environment in its place. The odds of overlapping the two seem really remote to me. But then again, having 1M device mostly flat broadcast domains also seems like an odd choice to me.