Why don't your Ethernet connectors look like this?

Because Ethernet Jacks don't look like this. Newfriend

>>56238453
Isn't this for Fiber?

>>56238453
Because I have shitty comcast internet and wouldn't even be able to saturate it

>>56238453
They will in about 20 years.

I've wished for fiber for a while now, but I recently realized that my 100mb/s connection is already more than enough.

He still uses dual channel fibre XD

Bitch here in China were at 6channels with 100gbps

>>56238530
They will figure out a more compact form factor before fiber wiring becomes common in homes.

>>56238540
Isn't that for corporate use? Here in Singapore we already started offering 10Gbps residential fibre service

>>56238552
My house already has fiber, just it comes with a converter to ethernet.

>>56238556
I still can't find a way to saturate 300Mbps.

And we accidentally got bumped to 500 since the ISP decided to discontinue 300Mbps.

I can't even reach 500Mbps because I use ancient shitty quality cat5e. I can get about 200Mbps at best.

>>56238556
How many people even have 10GigE ports on their computers?

>>56238593
>I can't even reach 500Mbps because I use ancient shitty quality cat5e. I can get about 200Mbps at best.
If your cat5e can't reach 1Gbps it's not cat5e or it's too long.

I tried cutting one to length but for some reason I couldn't get the connector on.

>>56238608
It is too long and it's in crappy physical condition.

>>56238598
The point is because we can <TM>

And also so we can saturate 10 GBe links simultaneously.

>>56238624
if you're a dude that's the problem
in the factories only women work with the connectors because men do not have the patience required

>>56238593
>I still can't find a way to saturate 300Mbps.
Dump UDP traffic on your lan and pretend you have a reason to install fiber switches and NICs.

>>56238666
Can something like LOIC do that?

>>56238571
Your house has fiber connecting it to your ISP, there no fiber in your walls. Probably

File: IMG_20160824_025436.jpg (808KB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

808KB, 2448x2448px

>>56238453
But they do. And considering you're posting a stock photo i'm guessing you're a poorfag who doesn't have 10GbE at home

>>56238540
>single connector
>dual channel
You really are this retarded arent you chink?

>>56238598
There are a few of us here. I have a server sitting under my bed with 12 10GbE ports

File: Bed Server.jpg (2MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x2448px

>>56238898
>I have a server sitting under my bed with 12 10GbE ports

>>56238913
What are you doing with it?

Some deep-packet inspection shit?

File: Screen Shot 2016-08-24 at 3.05.13 AM.png (1MB, 3360x2100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3360x2100px

>>56238935
>What are you doing with it?
Nothing, thats why it is sitting under my bed and is called the bedserver. The first pic is from my desktop running ESXi. The 10GbE ports go to a Cisco 3750E for routing because i cant find a keygen for VMware NSX, and havent bothered to try to setup a Cisco Nexus 1000V.

>>56238540
>china

Go steal some organs you worthless chink trash

>>56238453
Because splicing fiber optics cables requires a $5000 tool.

File: 286579-romanov.jpg (29KB, 609x640px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 609x640px

>>56238898
>>56238913
>I have a server sitting under my bed with 12 10GbE ports
you guys really like stashing your servers in the weirdest places, don't you?

>>56238709
Dunno about LOIC but it's really simple to do it in any low-level language.

>>56238976
I'm pretty sure you can get one for less than 2000$. If you're going to build a fiber optic lan that's the least of your problems, you can get a tech to splice your cables pretty much for free.

10G NICs, SFPs, swiches and the router are going to cost so much that you might as well buy a splicer for fun.

>>56238593
You should be fine with cat5e it's probably my your hardware no?

>>56238540
> XD
Kill yourself and then kill yourself some more, you scumshitter

>>56238774
I have fiber in walls, and a box behind my TV, the good cunt even found my old phone conduit at the road and ran it through that instead of stapling it to my fence or some dumb shit..

>>56238913
You keep it running there while you sleep? If so, 1) How do you tolerate the noise and 2) Aren't you concerned about the fire risk?

Currently setting up a 40gbit network, but the end customers only has 1gbit capable routers. Cost for 10g and 40g, was the same.

>>56239137
lmao red alert 2 memes

>>56239660
see >>56238629

File: image.jpg (127KB, 744x960px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 744x960px

Stupid question incoming but related.
Won't having 10gb/s constant data transfer take a big toll on the cpu and ram? Not to mention i bet that there are people with such net and 7200 rpm hdd.

>>56238453
Because fiber is more expensive than copper.

>>56238954
haha is this loser again

>>56238453
Because my 4g connection is good enough to simply tether my phone. Seeding is out of question though.

>>56238552
>hasn't actually seen these in person
They're pretty small. Unless you're talking about the size of the laser units, but even they are about as big as 3 Ethernet plugs.

>>56238499
yes

>>56238530
Normies can't into fiber. It would have to have bombproof shielding and convert to electrical at the connector so optical joint is never broken.

>>56238453
Because I live in Communist Islamaland formerly known as Germany, and technology is haram

>>56238453
But that's LC Connector you nitwit

>>56239223
>I'm pretty sure you can get one for less than 2000$.
>10G NICs, SFPs, swiches and the router are going to cost so much that you might as well buy a splicer for fun.
You dont understand how expensive (or not) 10GbE is do you? Dual 10GbE NICs with SFPs are well under $100, and you can get a Nexus 3064 with 48 10GbE ports and 4 40GbE ports for just over $1k on ebay.

>>56241287
>poorfag
>the post

>>56238540
>China

as if saying that is a positive

>>56243926
You're an idiot. You can have a switched 10GbE network with a few hosts for like 500 bucks, these days. Hell with that new Ubiquiti 10G switch you can have brand new stuff under 800 dollars. You're such a know nothing.

>>56244293
$500 is still too expensive for home networking.

>>56244425
>$500 is still too expensive for home networking.
And yet people will spend 350 dollars on AIO networking asstrash. You can even spend 500 on some gigabit switches, still. Stop your bullshit, guy.

>>56244445
$500 becomes $3000 if you put holes in your wall to do proper network wiring.

Most homes don't have Ethernet wiring, and many homes that do, the cabling is sub Category 5e, struggling even with gigabit ethernet let alone 10GigE.

>>56244471
>$500 becomes $3000 if you put holes in your wall to do proper network wiring.
What the fuck? No it doesn't. Are you paying a contractor? Cat5e doesn't struggle with GbE, either, it's literally the spec for full length GbE runs. Why are you so clueless man? Go back to your rusting garbage ESXi PC.

File: back.jpg (773KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

773KB, 1080x1920px

>>56238453
8GB FCAL, bonded gig-e. Not 10GB, but also several years old, and has sense been replaced.

Storage Spaces Direct interconnects are QDR infiniband
SAN is 10G, but I might move it to 16G FCAL
Front end is still gig-e.

>>56238913
answer >>56239954 I too am curious

>thinking ethernet is a connector

>>56246380
Shhh, just let these morons have their fun.

>>56244471
Like rewiring them is so fucking hard, you duct tape the new cable to the old one and pull on it.

>>56238453
Difficulty of splicing it. I can splice a cat5/6/7 cable easily.

>>56244293
>You're an idiot.
that projection from someone who can't read a post

>Ubiquiti 10G switch
laughingsluts.jpg You dont know what buffers are do you? There is a reason why they dont state how small they are.

>>56239954
>>56245952
It isnt running. The noise from it isnt particularly loud as the fans are PWM. And if it was running under the bed I wouldn't be worried about fire risk anymore than any of my other equipment. Its just a convenient place to put it.

>>56238453
what's the cheapest switch with at least 4 SFP+ ports?

>>56250241
I think the Quanta LB4M has 4 SFP+ ports and it's like 100-150.

>>56241266
its not a constant stream. and most people who use 10gb connections are splitting them up between multiple computers.

>>56250756
LB4M only has two 10G ports and it guzzles power, The LB6M is 24 port 10G and around $300US but it also idles at 130W. A Juniper EX3300 might be what you're looking for if power consumption is an issue. 60W but cost is around $600US.

Really depends if power is cheap where you live.

>>56246445
>>56246380
Yes it's called an 8P8C connector but anyone who says that and not 'Ethernet' is autistic

>>56250756
nah, it's one of many 1gbe switches with 2x 10gbe uplinks, designed mostly for ring topologies.

you ultimately need at least 3 10gbe ports per switch if you want to have more than 2 10gbe devices on the network, but you don't see many cheap-ish switches with more.

>>56250241
>cheapest switch with at least 4 SFP+ ports?
I've seen the D-Link DGS-1510-28X (24*1000BT + 4*SFP+) for as low as $550.
The cheapest pure SFP+ switch I've seen is the 12-port Dell X4012 for $1k.

>>56250891
>LB4M only has two 10G ports and it guzzles power
He said he wanted cheap. Not my fault it's shit. I thought it did have 4 ports, though.
>>56250958
>it's one of many 1gbe switches with 2x 10gbe uplinks
Ok? Still switches between them.

>>56238533
this

>why dont isnt your home LAN using fiber
because it wouldnt change anything?
I couldnt max out my copper cables if I tried, why would I use fiber?
Even if your ISP is fiber to the door, you still wouldnt benefit from having it in your house

>>56250993
>>it's one of many 1gbe switches with 2x 10gbe uplinks
>Ok? Still switches between them.

the issue is that only having 2x 10gbe ports on a switch is only marginally better than just using a direct patch cable.

>>56251121
Not that anon, but there are use cases, such as when you have a layer 3 switch and need to route between subnets/intervlan with something like ESXi because no one has bothered to make a keygen for VMware NSX yet. Also there are switches like my Catalyst 3750E which have stacking ports. Although it would be better just to get a real 10GbE switch, they're loud and I have no place to put it where it wouldnt annoy the fuck out of me.

>>56251121
>the issue is that only having 2x 10gbe ports on a switch is only marginally better than just using a direct patch cable.
It's significantly better as you can now access it from the network instead of just the two hosts.

>>56251035
>I couldnt max out my copper cables if I tried, why would I use fiber?
Lower latency and lower power consumption per port.

>>56238453
Because splicing glass in a home setting isn't easy, nor financially reasonable, and I wouldn't saturate it enough to make the conversion worth the time and money. I'd have to be doing some serious high level production shit to even think about it.

>>56251222
If you have e.g. a file server with a 10gb port and have clients actually pull down data faster than half the transfer rate of a single HDD, your current options are:

> crossover cables to a client
> cheap 1gb switch with 2 10gb uplinks for a single fast client, with maybe aggregated 1gb links to a few for slightly boosted speed
> pony up a lot more for a switch with 4 or more 10gb ports

I want to build a 10gb home NAS, but supporting more than 1 or 2 fast workstation client interfaces will be like another $1k instantly.
> could do 10gbase-t but power-hungry transceivers seem too shitty

>>56251239
why would you need lower lantency on your lan?
connecting to your media server?
it literally would not change anything

lower power consumption not guaranteed and also would not justify the cost to upgrade all the nics to fiber sfps

>>56251428
Yea, fast networking gets expensive. Luckily I'm still fine with GbE.

>>56238453
Are there any current mobos with 10gb Ethernet?

>>56238453
because, Obama

>>56251477
yes
or just buy a 10 gig pci nic

>>56251500
But is there a way to get cheap service or do I have to pay lots for business class internet?

>>56251477
Plenty. Workstation and 'server' boards mostly.

>>56238453
Becaus my ethernet is not gay.

>>56251449
>why would you need lower lantency on your lan?
Latency effects bandwidth, also if you do things like SAN latency matters as well.

>connecting to your media server?
just because the most complex thing you have experience with is Plex or Kodi doesn't mean everyone else is the same

>>56251477
Plenty of offerings from SuperMicro

>>56251507
it is unlikely you will get 10gbs to your house

slightly more likely (but not likely) that you could afford a 10gb wan link to a datacenter.

so no

>>56251477
the Xeon-D SOCs have 2x on-die 10gb controllers, so a lot of those boards obviously include ports.

a lot of other server boards include 2x 10GBASE-T interfaces more recently as well.
for workstations, no luck there really.

File: DM.png (785KB, 653x816px) Image search: [Google]

785KB, 653x816px

>>56251512
you must have a server room in your house that benefits from fiber. or youre talking out your ass and you know there is no benefit in a soho network.

File: Mellanox-chart3-tn.png (39KB, 470x355px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 470x355px

>>56251449
>lower power consumption not guaranteed and also would not justify the cost to upgrade all the nics to fiber sfps
It is, this is the very reason why there are not 10GBASE-T SFP+ modulues

File: Mellanox-chart1.png (142KB, 891x238px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 891x238px

>>56251449
>>56251553

>>56251541
>the Xeon-D SOCs
They're not SoCs, stop this meme.

>>56251553
>there are not 10GBASE-T SFP+ modulues
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/products/oas/product-detail.html?oid=8689430

>>56238453

Because I live in Canada and our internet is basically stone age tier compared to the rest of the world.

>>56251553
>all switchports are the same
>let me spend tons of money to get fiber to save nickels on power
>distance doesnt come into the equation
>upgrading network cards is worth the cost
its like buying a 60k hybrid car to save on gas

>>56238453
Ethernet =\= Fiber channel you dolt

File: Screen Shot 2016-08-24 at 9.04.21 PM.png (100KB, 1296x396px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1296x396px

>>56251595
>all switchports are the same
Go find me a 10GBASE-T SFP+ module. You can't due to power consumption.

>let me spend tons of money to get fiber
>tons
My X2 SR modules were $10 each and 5 meter OM3 SC LC cables were another $8 or so each. SFP+ SR modules are just as cheap.

>distance doesnt come into the equation
fiber always has longer distance than BASE-T copper.

>upgrading network cards is worth the cost
The overwhelming majority of 10GbE nics are SFP+

>>56238898
The chink didn't mention how many connectors.

>>56251813
>I dont know what a MTP and MPO is
OP was clearly talking about SC connectors

>>56251654
>Go find me a 10GBASE-T SFP+ module. You can't due to power consumption.
Hi>>56251592

File: 91Z1JCp0mtL._SL1500_.jpg (209KB, 1125x1500px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1125x1500px

>>56252355
>>56251592
>http://www8.hp.com/us/en/products/oas/product-detail.html?oid=8689430
Isn't real 10GBASE-T, it has a 30m cable length limit because of power consumption.

>>56252421
>Isn't real 10GBASE-T
????
Yes, it is.
> it has a 30m cable length limit because of power consumption.
Wow move the goalposts farther, faggot.

>>56252434
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Gigabit_Ethernet#10GBASE-T
Real 10GBASE-T does 55 meters over CAT 6 and 100 meters over CAT 6A. It isnt real 10GBASE-T

>>56238453
Because then it wouldn't be Ethernet.

>>56252491
You're a fucking retard.

>>56252544
stay butthurt anon that it only supports 1/3rd the distance as required by 802.3an-2006

>>56238540
>china
Enjoy your government's dick down your throat

>>56252421
> 30m cable length limit 10GBASE-T

what's the fucking point of this product?
cheap retrofits of SFP+ card to 10GBASE-T top-of-rack switches?

>>56252719
>what's the fucking point of this product?

It's for people who are allergic to fiberglass.

>>56238540
What good is fast internet if everything gets censored there anyway?

>>56252719
>what's the fucking point of this product?
There are some motherboards which have on board 10-GBASET such as the bed server previously pictured in this thread. I'm assuming for those. I dont know who would buy a 10GBASE-T ToR switch, so few NICs use 10GBASE-T.

>>56252574
Specification is not a requirement.

>>56238468
Ethernet is a protocol and works perfectly well over optical fiber. However eth is usually just for aggregating into a proper optical protocol like SONET or packet OTN.

My dildo looks like this

>>56238453
i don't like slacked cables
give me the tight corners

>>56252842
>standards dont matter
stay butthurt anon

>>56252910
>don't move my goalposts back!
Stay retarded. 10GBase-T does not have a length requirement, the cables do. If I run 10GBase-T with a 3 foot patch cable, is it not 10GBase-T?

>>56252981
It is required to support cables of a certain length. Stay butthurt anon.

>>56238453
Some do, most dont. Optics are expensive and 10gbaset is now finally reasonable for medium range, twinax is always a better value for short distance.

>>56253008
>>56252981
>>56252910
>>56252842
>>56252574
>>56252544
>>56252491
>>56252434
>>56252421
>>56252355
>>56251592
>>56251553
jesus fuck what a pedantic argument.

The basic deal with 10GBase-T is that it used LDPC/Gallager codes, which like Turbo codes, have very low bandwidth overhead for redundancy, but are very computationally complex to recover when errors are encountered.

Hence, all the extra power draw comes (perhaps unintuitively) from the receiver and not the transmitter.

If a 10GBase-T transceiver is lower power and length restricted, it's because it will have more limited signal reconstruction capacity. It can still presumably send fully compliant physical frames on the wire, it just won't be able to decode everything it receives as much as the spec calls for.

Also I'd say that
>>56251553
>>lower power consumption not guaranteed and also would not justify the cost to upgrade all the nics to fiber sfps
>It is, this is the very reason why there are not 10GBASE-T SFP+ modulues
isn't right, it's because the SFP+ port standard just doesn't provide enough power.
Over the long run, it's better to just use SFP+ on rack installs to save ~10 W per client box, but it would be a case-by-case decision whether any given upgrade would be close to worth it (and in most cases wouldn't be)

>>56253534
>isn't right, it's because the SFP+ port standard just doesn't provide enough power.
Thats what I was arguing if you would have bothered to read the thread before posting

>>56250945
try rj45 faggot calling it an 8p8c baka desu senpai

>>56253583
sorry, read your "it is" to mean the costs are guaranteed to be justified.
in any case you shouldn't have engaged with a troll

>>56253615
You mean TIA/EIA-568 dumbass

>>56253658
>in any case you shouldn't have engaged with a troll
I dont think its a troll, most of /g/ are retarded when it comes to anything outside of consumer grade equipment, and even then.

>>56253673
>most of /g/ are retarded
Sometimes, less is more, anon...

>>56253658
>sorry, read your "it is" to mean the costs are guaranteed to be justified.
Also I was >>56251239

>>56238540

Why do you have six channels when this website only has four?

>>56238540
We still don't have fibre at all in Canada. Its DSL unless you're a big apartment complex or a company.

File: 1469368432668.jpg (50KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 633x758px

>>56254709
I feel you canadabro

>>56254735
Toronto has fibre in some neighborhoods, but it costs like $150/mo.

>>56254754
Vancouver here, its Telus, Shaw, or Rodgers here. None of with offer fibre of any kind to 97% of the city. They don't even offer anything above 30mbps adsl for most of the city either.

>>56254779
Rogers has Cable/Internet presence in BC?

>>56254800
Yeah, but genuinely trash service, almost worse than shaw, and shaws fucking awful. Telus isn't much better though.

>>56238453
Because that not Ethernet fuckwit that's full duplex fiber

>>56238453
>paying $10+ for terminators

You can get a million RJ-45 terminators for the price of a single LC. God forbid you go keyed.

>>56254709
Same in the UK. The current plan is for 60% of homes to have 300mbps G.fast available by 2025, which still uses copper phone lines.
This is what happens when you privatize public services.

>>56238453
optical cables break all the time, it's not worth it.

>>56252758
>so few NICs use 10GBASE-T
The intel X540 Dual Port NIC is widely used for cheap san implementations. We have those in our hyperv hosts along with some redundant 10GBase-T switches. They offer easy and cheap cabling and usability.