<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><BR><DIV><DIV>On Mar 8, 2006, at 12:00 PM, <A href="mailto:beowulf-request@beowulf.org">beowulf-request@beowulf.org</A> wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Lucida Grande" size="4" style="font: 13.0px Lucida Grande">... that's nice marketing-speak, but content-free, I'm afraid. ... though I have to say I really don't expect optical </FONT><FONT face="Lucida Grande" size="4" style="font: 13.0px Lucida Grande">WDM firewire to make any difference ;) ... I'd personally love to see something better in every way than GBE/10GE, </FONT>but just don't see it happening. no, please, don't suggest IB :)</P> </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><DIV> <DIV>Well, it can, does and will make a difference "real soon, now", considering that since metal conductors are close to the upper throughput limits dictated by the laws of physics and laws of diminishing returns. Pushing more data through a metal conductor, beyond several Gigabits per second, requires more and more power over shorter and shorter metal conductors ... and considering power (heat) and cross talk (noise) v. conductor length (of antenna) ... you sure don't want to open an active box as the microwave radiation could fry your gonads (resulting legal action being the main reason no one is seriously promoting 20 or 30 Gigabit Ethernet over wires).</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Intel (et al) is seeking alternates to the above: <A href="http://www.intel.com/technology/silicon/sp/">http://www.intel.com/technology/silicon/sp/</A> ... data transfer over packet switching networks using multiple frequencies (multiplexed "colors") and approaching Terabits per second over a silicon glass fiber bus.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Key point: determination of the protocol of choice for this "Glass Bus". Candidates include packet switching and non-packet switching protocols: FireWire, USB, SATA, PCI (e or other), Fibre Channel, iSCSI / SAS, <FONT class="Apple-style-span" face="Verdana">InfiniBand, </FONT>EtherNet and possibly others ... and considering that FireWire is the most hardware/ firmware efficient for a given microprocessor speed, having the most hardware efficient, packet switching network and being peer to peer topography ... </DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Thus the previous discussion(s) Re: " ... Why is it comparable to or faster from a processor running at around 40% of GigaBit processor speeds? Processor efficiency FireWire has a 32-bit "risc" type microprocessor, is peer to peer in hardware / firmware and has other lean architecture features. (Small address space, data frame large = more efficient data packet over double duplex connections.)</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>(Picture this: a coffee can containing multiple processors on multiple circuit boards in close proximity fanning out from a central glass rod or fiber running through the axis ... linking to other coffee cans ...)</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>EOR = end of rant</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Ed Karns</DIV><DIV>FireWireStuff.com </DIV> <BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"> </DIV></BODY></HTML>