datasheets.com EBN.com EDN.com EETimes.com Embedded.com PlanetAnalog.com TechOnline.com  
Events
UBM Tech
UBM Tech

News & Analysis

Bechtolsheim brainstorms on next networking wave

Rick Merritt

10/17/2012 9:46 AM EDT


SAN JOSE, Calif. – The technical horizon in networking as not as bright as it is for semiconductors, but it’s pretty darned good, according to network guru Andreas von Bechtolsheim.

Andy should know. He's a co-founder of Sun Microsystems, served as its chief hardware designer and has been designing high-end network switches since he founded Granite Systems in the go-go days of 1995. Cisco Systems bought the company for a cool $220 million, bankrolling this engineer’s engineer who passed on the favor when Google’s founders’ came calling. He wrote their first check for $100,000.

[Get a 10% discount on ARM TechCon 2012 conference passes by using promo code EDIT. Click here to learn about the show and register.]

The bad news is networking is not keeping up with the heady pace of Moore’s Law because of I/O bandwidth bottlenecks. Instead of doubling as chips do in transistor density every two years, networking bandwidths double about every four years (see below).


Click on image to enlarge.

Bechtolsheim gathered his thoughts in a keynote at the Linley Tech Processor Conference here.

“Moore’s Law is alive and well, and there has been nothing like it in the history of mankind,” he said. Thanks to solid work on serdes and merchant chips, networking is set to continue its traditional bandwidth “doubling every four years or so--it’s a nice improvement, but not at the rate of Moore’s Law,” said Bechtolsheim who briefly worked for Intel when he first arrived in Silicon Valley in 1977.

Bechtolsheim gets deeply technical at the drop of a slide rule. Discussing the impacts of data centers on network design, he quickly dropped down two levels to note a new DCTCP protocol can reduce by ten percent or so the need for mega-buffers on aggregation switches—an interesting detail.

But his bigger point was there is another wave yet to come. Network protocols and apps need to be tuned to better understand the underlying networks capacity. That’s heavy lifting, so in the meantime network switch design is all about right sizing buffers, he said.

Again without a breath he jumps down two levels in the technology to compute the requirements. “That’s [a buffer of] 100 Kbytes per flow and 10 flows per server, so a Mbyte per server and 10 Gbytes be switch,” he said.






rick.merritt

10/18/2012 2:39 PM EDT

Does Andy have it right? wrong? What do you think?

Sign in to Reply



elPresidente

10/19/2012 4:40 PM EDT

That "100,000 chips or it ain't worth it" has been the mantra for decades - nothing new.

100Gb/s FPGAs have been around for a couple of years now. Again, nothing new.

No mention of 160Gb/s, or 400Gb/s, which are upcoming. Sounds to me like he's trying to solve procurement channel problems in his investment portfolio, vs being a visionary driver of industry.

Sign in to Reply



Philip Papadopoulos

10/26/2012 5:43 PM EDT

There is a fundamental utility limit of the network entering/exiting a server -- that's memory bandwidth. 400Gb/s is 50GB/sec, which is on par with achievable total memory bandwidth of common servers. When your network becomes faster than memory speed, you have to wonder about practical utility of that extra unusable capacity. I would argue that the practical limit is closer to single memory channel speed, not aggregate system memory bandwidth. Today, a 2100MHz DDR3 Channel is 17GB/sec ~ 136Gbps.

Sign in to Reply



krh

10/20/2012 12:33 AM EDT

$$ per bit...Andy has it right for the next 5 years...

Sign in to Reply



rick.merritt

10/22/2012 4:39 PM EDT

Two great and opposing views here.

I'd love to hear some more thoughtful opinions on whether Andy has the future of networking right and why or why not.

Sign in to Reply



Philip Papadopoulos

10/26/2012 5:36 PM EDT

1) Andy's talking about the server space. I think he's bang on. The adoption curves look to be very similar to past networking tech uptakes.

2) He's not talking about the desktop space and/or wireless space. GigE is now pressed down on el-cheapo DIY motherboards, but you don't really need greater than 1GbE in your house for the next 1/2 decade) Hence, you cannot necessarily make the same volume argument for bringing down the price of 10GbE at the same rate.

That means that the absolute price of 10G won't drop as quickly as it did for 1G, but it will get there. Of that, I have no doubt. Afterall, as people rely on network (buzzword cloud) services, the number of servers continues to rise. And Ideally you keep constant BW/core as you deploy big systems. As core count rises, so do your network bandwidth needs.

Sign in to Reply



Please sign in to post comment

Navigate to related information

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)