>Is this really a problem? Yes. >How often would a single TCP session have allocated to itself an >entire gigabit link? Think server-less backup on a Storage Area Network. >I'm not aware of any end systems or apps that generate data at this rate ( >especially for any extended length of time), much less accept it. >Maybe I'm looking at this wrong. IP-based Storage Area Networks will generate data at this rate and higher. We will have a 10 Gb Ethernet standard soon, and IP-based SAN vendors intend to be ready with NICs and storage systems that can run at that rate. Furthermore, the IEEE tends to up Ethernet by an order of magnitude every 3 years or so. That means that by 2011 we should be planning for 10,000 Gbps Ethernet. ================================================================= Thought for the day: "This is no IP network. It's their love child, man" -- Dennis Hopper
- An alternative to TCP (part 1) Jun'an Gao
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) John Stracke
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) stanislav shalunov
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Randall R. Stewart
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Fred Baker
- RE: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Christian Huitema
- RE: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Larry Foore
- RE: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Tony Hain
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Bernard Aboba
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) stanislav shalunov
- RE: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Jun'an Gao
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Jun'an Gao
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Jun'an Gao
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Jun'an Gao
- RE: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Jun'an Gao
- RE: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Larry Foore
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Keith Moore
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Jon Crowcroft
- Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1) Colin Perkins