[HN Gopher] 25 Gigabit Linux internet router PC build ___________________________________________________________________ 25 Gigabit Linux internet router PC build Author : secure Score : 421 points Date : 2021-07-10 11:49 UTC (11 hours ago) (HTM) web link (michael.stapelberg.ch) (TXT) w3m dump (michael.stapelberg.ch) | ksec wrote: | The most surprising details was [1] from init7. | | >Compatibility requirements There is no obligation on you to | procure the hardware through us, and the hardware shown here is | not the only possible hardware for you to use. There are also | other compatible products, as long as the requisite <<bi-di>> | fibre optic technology conforms to the following specifications | (recommended: Flexoptix, more router information): | | No Modem / ONT. Just a Router with compatible SFP optic. I wish | more ISP do that. And not force me to use your crappy ONT or Wifi | Router. They could of course go another router and provide actual | decent ONT or WiFi Router. But the chance of happening, or they | care about quality is slim. | | [1] https://www.init7.net/en/internet/hardware/ | tw04 wrote: | I'd strongly recommend people take a look at the supermicro (or | your vendor of choice) Xeon-d or AMD embedded 3000 series. | | Lower power draw, very quiet and more than powerful enough to | push 25gbit with cpu left over for VMs. | sydney6 wrote: | To get a grip around the numbers, i quote from George Neville- | Neil's Talk at BSDCan '15 "Measure Twice, Code Once" [1]: | | - 10 Gbps is 14.8 million 64 byte packets per second - 67.5 ns | per packet or 200 cycles at 3 GHz - Cache miss is 32 ns | | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE4wMsP7zeA | eqvinox wrote: | You're not running a continuous stream of 64-byte packets in a | home or SME setup. Also, assuming a 1:1 mapping to packet | processing is a false dichotomy these days, NICs are doing an | _unbelievable_ amount of preprocessing, particularly grouping | related packets together. | sydney6 wrote: | No, of course not. A good starting point for real world | performance benchmarking could be e.g. IMIX [1]. | | The example above represents the solely theroretical worst | case as a means to establish a baseline for performance | benchmarking. | | Anyway, if you are referring to HW offloading capabilities of | "modern" NIC's, using techniques like LRO would break the | "end-to-end"-principle of a router. | | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Mix | great-potential wrote: | Not sure why you buy at fs.com when you have online stores in CH | that are selling much cheaper: | | https://www.microspot.ch/de/computer-gaming/pc-komponenten/s... | nimish wrote: | Without PPS measurements its hard to say how good this is. | 1.488MPPS is needed to saturate a gigabit connection and that | usually needs some tricks like poll mode drives/dpdk/etc on | commodity hardware. | Mave83 wrote: | why no just buy a good nvidia/mellanox nic and route directly on | it? Modern NIC's are amazing and you can offload everything if | you like. | ju-st wrote: | but it is only offloaded to some ARM cores and not done in | hardware? can they really route and NAT 25gbit? and the manuals | for connectx-5 or nvidia bluefield don't even mention ipv6? | kortilla wrote: | The article leaves out the actual network packet processing. Is | this being done by the kernel or is dpdk being used? | specialist wrote: | Very cool post. Thank you. | | This article, and its many links, are helping noob me learn how | to ask about I/O perf. | | TechEmpower benchmarks HTTP servers. While contestants continue | to improve, I've long been curious what the _theoretical_ fastest | HTTP server _could_ be. https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/ | | Basically, an update to the "C10K problem" for the year 2021. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C10k_problem | | A bit like how Daniel Lemire initially thought about parsing | JSON. Paraphrasing: Why can't a JSON parser run at wire speed? | "Parsing JSON quickly: early comparisons in the wild" | https://lemire.me/blog/2019/03/02/parsing-json-quickly-early... | | -- | | Also, I really appreciate including the sound and cooling | considerations. It's just great seeing the process of system | design accommodating (balancing) multiple goals. Bravo. | goodpoint wrote: | > Basically, an update to the "C10K problem" for the year 2021. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C10k_problem | | No, routing, natting and terminating connections are very | different problems. | | Especially if we consider different implementations. | timvdalen wrote: | I spent a couple of hours last week trying to set up a fiber | connection in our new office. Since I didn't want to use consumer | hardware in an office setting (and I already had a router that | was compatible), I opted for getting my own hardware (a media | converter). | | I had _some_ prior knowledge of networking, but had never messed | around with VLAN and MTUs before. Luckily I found this[1] gist | for a comparable setup that saved me. I'm still only getting | 350Mbps where I should be getting 1Gbps, but I _think_ that's | just due to the bad networking chip in my cheap chromebook. When | I move all my stuff to the office, we'll see what we can top out | at... | | All this is to say, I definitely respect the effort the author | put into this and it pains me to find out that my new SFP setup | is already obsolete :). | | [1]: | https://gist.github.com/Ruben-E/abb9a4a872a7c4ffff058ae291ef... | clktmr wrote: | The most interesting part for me came at the end: It runs | router7+gokrazy, a self-written pure-Go userland instead of the | traditional GNU userland. | daneel_w wrote: | At some point the idea of "use more case fans, then all of them | run at lower RPM" simply turns on you and instead produce more | noise. For the low wattages of this build a single case fan | would've been sufficient to keep PSU and CPU fan at silent | levels. | | I have a few more watts in my PC case, but not a single case fan, | and the machine still hovers at a comfortably quiet level at 1 | meter's distance. No temperature issues. | secure wrote: | Yeah, I'll probably turn off some fans to see how the | temperatures react. That's for some time in the future, | though... :) | cedricgle wrote: | I wish P4 fpga boards weren't so expensive for hobbyist. You can | do fun stuff with them and create a custom network pipeline. It's | totally overkill for a home network (they are used to create | datacenter fabric) but it's nice and shiny :) | pmorici wrote: | Kind of surprised there wasn't much attention paid to the | software. My understanding is that with stuff like DPDK and fd.io | you can get much better performance without going to extremes | with your hardware. Netgate TNSR is one product that puts all the | opensource pieces together to make it easy but it is all | opensource software so should be usable by the average home user. | h43k3r wrote: | Author has written his own router software and probably wants | to continue to develop it. They are much more pro than your | normal average home user. | floatinglotus wrote: | With a Xeon, a SmartNIC, and DPDK you can hit 100 Gbps. | virtuallynathan wrote: | I was going to say that... with fd.io this should be pretty | easy these days. | formerly_proven wrote: | > I read on many different sites that AMD's current CPUs beat | Intel's CPUs in terms of performance per watt. We can better | achieve goals 2 and 3 (low noise and low power usage) by using | fewer watts, so we'll pick an AMD CPU and mainboard for this | build. | | Unfortunately many reviews are very misleading here. Zen 2/3 CPUs | have good performance per Watt, that's true. But for a machine | like this, which will be mostly idle, this is not the interesting | metric and Zen 2/3 systems show that you can combine good perf/W | with poor idle power consumption (which is not true for their | monolithic APU brethren, which are used in laptops). | | One of the biggest idle power hogs for these is the IO die, so | make sure that XMP is disabled and the memory uses one of the | slow JEDEC timings. This should be fine for a router. Check that | the SoC/NB voltage is set to 1 V or less. Some boards set this | higher. In the AMD CBS section of the board firmware there should | be an item "SoC OC Mode" somewhere. Disable it. Some boards allow | you to set a new PPT (package power target), but it's worth | pointing out that values which are too low will make the CPU very | slow because it essentially forces all cores to very low power | states in order to meet the PPT since the CPU can't influence the | baseline power (due to fabric and I/O die). The upside of using a | reasonable PPT of e.g. 50-60 W is that you reduce power | consumption if some errant task hogs the CPU. | | These settings make a big difference, but only if the CPU is | _really_ idle. Even fairly light loads (e.g. on a desktop, moving | the mouse on the background) has everything rev up. In deep idle | (nothing running at all, no user interaction on a desktop) you | might get a Zen 2 /3 CPU down to around 20 Watts, but as soon as | anything is happening at all we're straight back to the 40-70 W | region. | | Using an Intel system for this would have likely saved 10-20 W. | iforgotpassword wrote: | Yes I can unfortunately confirm this. Don't know how much has | changed, but about a year ago my current employer evaluated | about 10 desktop pcs from dell, lenovo, hp and the likes as all | staff was supposed to get new machines. One of the important | criteria was power consumption. The few AMD systems that were | among the contestants had absolutely ridiculous idle | consumption and weren't even considered any further. | jiggawatts wrote: | Using local retail electricity prices, the idle power draw of | 20-40W for the AMD CPUs comes out to $20-$40 per annum. | | If THAT breaks the bank, run screaming from your workplace as | fast as you possibly can. The bean counters can't count, and | they're being penny wise and pound foolish in the worst | possible way. | | AMD CPUs run circles around anything Intel makes. Total | performance, performance per core, price/performance, and | performance per watt. | | Giving all of that up for... $20? Seriously? | ta988 wrote: | At work people leave their computers and screens on (and | unlocked most of the time)... (edit): I tried to educate but | nobody really care... | zymhan wrote: | Hence the need for lower idle power consumption | judge2020 wrote: | Maybe in your office, but when I was in the office we had a | culture of pressing Win+L or the dedicated lock key on the | keyboard and letting Windows turn off the display after a | minute of being on the lock screen. | chefkoch wrote: | That's what Group Policy is for. | ta988 wrote: | Yes I tried to explain both the energy and security | reasons behind locking and hibernate/sleep. | nfriedly wrote: | At my job people tend to post silly things in slack, like | an "I love ponies" giphy image, when they see _someone | else 's_ computer unlocked and unattended. | [deleted] | uvesten wrote: | Great :) I've been wondering what equipment to get when I upgrade | to the 25 gbit connection too. Maybe a custom build is the way to | go after all! | phreeza wrote: | One day init7 is going to poach you :) | spicyramen wrote: | Good post, bring me back old memories where I used to setup my | own PCs back in high school. I think the graphics card and GPU | are really not required for a router. Few years ago there was a | Linux project called zebra router which was deprecated in favor | of https://www.quagga.net/ | InTheArena wrote: | I have a Unifi UDMP, which while I think is probably the best | prosumer option right now, falls way short due to a PPPoE problem | that limits fiber connections to under 500mb/s, and the lack of | load balancing across multiple link networks (which I totally | admit, is a first world problem). | | I am thinking about building my own, but then comes the | maintaince of all of the hardware / software. For me that would | be fine, but for my family, it would be a total PITA to manage, | and any downtime would be horrible. | | So, stuck with UDMP for the moment, until they either fix their | problems, or alternatively I decide to bite the bullet and build | this on top of linux. | lbotos wrote: | Can you link or elaborate more on this PPPoE problem? i have a | UDMP on the way, and I don't think I'll be affected by it with | my simple network design, but also not sure. | toast0 wrote: | PPPoE de-encapuslation is likely not hardware accelerated (or | can't be combined with other hardware accelerated packet | processing) or if that platform is more PC like than I | thought, it may be that the PPPoE de-encapsulation is single | threaded either as a missed software feature or because the | nic can't separate it into multiple queues. | | PPPoE is one of the worst network protocols ever, and there's | no reason it should have been implemented on fiber. I don't | really understand why it was implemented on DSL either; maybe | some bizarro way to try to prevent theft of service? | InTheArena wrote: | It's determined by your WAN provider. Centurylink and google, | (AFAIK) leverage PPPoE connections, and the network traffic | there seems to be limited around 600mb/s. | | I replaced the connection with a cable drop, which I get | 1.2gb/s down on. | subhro wrote: | Odroid N2? | InTheArena wrote: | Need a lot more power then that to handle 2x 1GB/s | connections. | coder543 wrote: | What? | | The UDM Pro[0] has a quad-core Cortex A57 CPU running at | 1.7GHz, according to the spec sheet I'm looking at right | now. It has 4GB of RAM. | | The ODROID-N2+[1] has a quad-core Cortex A73 CPU running at | 2.4GHz. It also has 4GB of RAM. | | The UDM Pro is like half the performance of the ODROID-N2+, | accounting for architecture and frequency differences, | so... I'm not sure what you're getting at? | | The ODROID should be _more_ than enough to handle a gigabit | connection if the UDM Pro is even halfway capable of it, | from a power perspective. Connecting more ethernet ports to | it without an exposed PCIe connector is going to be clunky, | but that 's not the issue you pointed out. | | [0]: https://dl.ubnt.com/ds/udm-pro | | [1]: https://www.hardkernel.com/shop/odroid-n2-with-4gbyte- | ram-2/ | eqvinox wrote: | No, you really don't. Though the problem in this case is | the N2 only has 1 GbE port and adding more through USB, | even 3.0, is notoriously bad (regardless of the platform.) | | (source: I benchmarked my N2+. It'll route and NAT 1 GBit | quite leisurely.) | kazen44 wrote: | > falls way short due to a PPPoE problem that limits fiber | connections to under 500mb/s, and the lack of load balancing | across multiple link networks (which I totally admit, is a | first world problem). | | how are you achieving load balancing? using LACP? not having | working LACP seems kind of unacceptable in my opinion for suchs | an expensive device. | | Also, older enterprise grade routing hardware can be had for | very cheap. | InTheArena wrote: | It has a failover over the two WAN ports, but no load | balancing at all across them. | j1elo wrote: | I'm always amazed by people who don't bat an eye on the | perspective of having a home server, sucking up electricity 24/7. | In this case replacing a typical router (which consumes like a | lightbulb), with a full-fledged PC (probably consuming like x100 | the power). | | I guess some people around the world have quite cheap utility | bills! For me, it's either a Raspberry Pi type of power | consumption, or else a server that only powers on when needed. | But I haven't learned yet how to do the latter, if possible at | all. | | In fact this is a nice place to ask: how would you build a | "something" that monitors the network for packets sent to | powered-off machines, then somehow caches the request, powers the | destination machine On, and finally lets the request continue to | its target? Has this been tackled anywhere? There must be tons of | people wanting a homeserver but living in places where | electricity has a considerable cost... | antonzabirko wrote: | I mean if it's a problem just solve it. Yes, the folks in texas | who have to pay 10x for electricity probably shouldn't get in | if thuy can't afford it. Also, get solar/wind if you are | concerned aboit the impact. | zbrozek wrote: | I have a symmetric 10 gbps connection at home. I have an EPYC | machine that plays host to a number of virtual machine guests | for various tasks. One of them is running opnsense to be my | router. It's not fast enough to route at line speed, but it's | close enough that I don't care. A consumer router or a pi or | something would be far slower, and I would start to care. | | Having a tolerably powerful computer doing this means that it's | also my web server for several sites, stores local backups and | handles offsite backups, acts as my print server, and hosts a | Windows virtual machine for using proprietary software (e.g., | for my label printers or firmware updates for random widgets | like my Lutron light system). | | Quiescent appears to be something in the neighborhood of 40 | watts. It's not nothing, but it's acceptable, especially for | the utility. I don't pay for a VPS because I have the bandwidth | and the capacity to self-host everything I want. I spend $8/mo | in electricity to run that machine, and that will drop to zero | when my solar array and battery become functional. | | If the power consumption were 5x worse I would probably not | have gone this route. | tyingq wrote: | His starting requirements include one pci card for 25gb and | another for 4 port 10gb. I don't think there's any low power | way to do that. Any motherboard with enough slots, CPU power, | and PCI lanes to handle all that aggregate bandwidth isn't | going to be low power setup. If you underpowered it, then you | might as well back off of 25gb/10gb. | | So it's not really a home server. It just happens to be in a | home. | FpUser wrote: | >"I'm always amazed by people who don't bat an eye on the | perspective of having a home server, sucking up electricity | 24/7" | | Some people simply run business from home and it is legitimate | business expense. For example in Toronto server consuming 200 | Watt 24x7 comes to about $20/month. Not much to dwell about if | you are making money as a business. | swiley wrote: | Many of these things are really competing with a $20/mo VPS so | a full PC that's on 24/7 is still cheaper. Yes you could go | further: use portable slim apps that fit on ARM SBCs but then | you have to re-do your server config and learn a new app. | | Plus, at least for me, my PC is on 24/7 _anyway._ | Zenst wrote: | For some perspective, this is a nice list of many household | appliances and their power usage: | https://www.daftlogic.com/information-appliance-power-consum... | easygenes wrote: | I have a computer in a room that's generally otherwise too | cold... so all that power is just useful heat dumped into the | room. | londons_explore wrote: | If you pay a lot for electricity, you could get heat cheaper | with a heat pump, gas furnace, or simply adding insulation on | the roof/walls so any heat you do add lasts longer. | varjag wrote: | Re-insulating a house is a substantial cost that can take a | decade to pay back in utility bills. | londons_explore wrote: | Yet spending $6 on draught excluders to keep the wind out | can pay back in just a day or two. | | It all depends on your baseline... | midasuni wrote: | Albeit not as efficient as say a heat pump | NorwegianDude wrote: | That depends. The heat might be used in a heat pump for all | we know. | deadbunny wrote: | Significantly cheaper though. | yjftsjthsd-h wrote: | Cheaper to buy, but not to run | johndhowell wrote: | I personally run two servers with a NAS 24/7 acting as media, | ftp, and web server. My electric bill maybe increased a couple | of dollars, but otherwise I haven't really noticed any | significant increase. I'm based in the southern US | tibbon wrote: | I've got a handful of computers running in a rack at home. | Their total power? Around 400w. | | I also have a dehumidifier running all the time in the | basement. It's power usage is 500w. | | No one bats and eye at a heater or dehumidifier, but a computer | and people get worried | sponaugle wrote: | I agree with your sentiment. It is interesting to look at | total power usage and power usage by device. I'm using | IotaWatts to monitor every individual circuit in my house | (over 200 of them), and it is easy to miss things that add | up. With computers it is quite amazing the difference in | power load based on cpu/disk load. When I run my PI | calculator (which not only pegs CPU, but hits my SAN very | hard) I see over a 1kw difference in my homelab power draw. | 542458 wrote: | I mean, I would bat an eye at a humidifier running 24/7 | without any sort of automatic on/off based on humidity levels | but maybe in your climate that's more normal? | jodrellblank wrote: | > " _No one bats and eye at a heater_ " | | Then where did the sitcom style stereotype of Dad always | turning the thermostat down come from? | mirekrusin wrote: | 45W is not really "sucking up electricity", it's really nothing | compared to other things in the house. I don't think PC is | consuming 100x more as well, less than 10x and the same or | nothing when not used. | ClumsyPilot wrote: | I put together a tiny server with power consumption in mind, it | consumes 15W and has i3-8100, that's enough to run just about | everything I can be bothered to run: kubernetes, owncast, | homeassistant, pihole, etc. | | Generally, a laptop or Intel Nuc will give you a good low power | server, much better platforms for development than a PI. | | Then if you decide you need a RAID array, that's a different | ball game. | hatware wrote: | I have decade old hardware that is certainly inefficient, but | my services hosted have taught me so much it's not even worth | the comparison. Yes, electricity is cheap in America but we all | choose to spend money on our hobbies as we please. | | I'll bet there's a few nitpicks with your hobbies where you | trade a lot of time/money/something that I don't necessarily | understand. And that's okay. | michael1999 wrote: | Yes. In fact, apple's AirPort Extreme units do that for macs in | the house though their zeroconf networking. On sleep, the | airport borrows the address and ARPs it. On traffic to that IP, | it holds it, sends a special wake packet to the sleeping nic, | and then re-sends the packet to with the real MAC, and the | waking machine picks it up. | cptskippy wrote: | My home has a 0.5-0.7kWh idle load, with the varying 0.2kWh | being from the refrigerators cycling. I tried shutting down my | NAS and Home server and it was less than 0.1kWh. | | I'm at a loss to explain exactly what is drawing 0.4kWh of | power but my neighbor has a similar load on his. I'm suspecting | all of the fancy and useless motion/astro light switches | installed are partially to blame but there's no easy way to | verify that. | harikb wrote: | There is such a thing as wake-on-lan | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake-on-LAN | flatiron wrote: | I run just plex and pi hole. Money I save with plex that I | don't need a million different services and having no ads at | home is well worth the price. One day my friends went out and I | couldn't go. They got all drunk and shared how much they rely | on my plex and by the time I woke up I had close to $1k in | PayPal and a note that said "for an upgrade and your time" so | honestly I probably making out on the deal. Went from a haswell | pentium to a ninth gen i3. 8 gigs to 16. SSD for the root | drive. 8 TB staging server before going to google drive. $20 a | month for unlimited google drive is way more than the power to | run the server. But I have about 80TB on there. Can't store | that for less than $20 a month no matter how you slice it. | lostlogin wrote: | Does Google check or care what is on there? That would make | me nervous. | flatiron wrote: | I use encfs. Big scary warning on Ubuntu when you install | it that it's not 100% fool proof but for storing tv and | movies in the cloud I think it's fine. Best part is it's | totally seemless on my end. Uploads encrypted and my view | is unencrypted. | lostlogin wrote: | Thanks. | j1elo wrote: | I've been looking at the offers of big providers and the | average seems to be pretty much standard: 2 TB for $10/month. | All across Dropbox, Google, Apple, even Microsoft (the | individual plan) are in the same ballpark. | flatiron wrote: | Google drive enterprise for $20 a month for unlimited is | the best I've found. Rclone and encfs to mount and send the | content. Almost 0 issues. | flatiron wrote: | I've read that it costs them $2 to store a single TB a | month. Which makes sense. $4 -> $10 is a reasonable markup. | I store 80 TB for $20. They lose money on me. | _huayra_ wrote: | I've been using pcloud which has a lifetime plan which is a | pretty good deal. I recommend waiting until black friday or | August 1 (Swiss national day; they're a CH-based company) | when they severely drop the price. | rzzzt wrote: | I do remember a "smart NIC" making its rounds in the news a few | years ago -- although "few" in this case might be >10. It was | essentially a low-power machine in itself (with no Raspberry | Pis in sight yet) that could finish an HTTP download or receive | e-mails without waking up the host computer. But that's more | high-level than the buffering/relaying of packets you are | thinking of. | | Edit: a bit weird, I wrote a very similar comment a year ago | about this item. Now I feel slightly compelled to find the news | source for it... | rasz wrote: | asus "killer nic", almost pure marketing wankery with little | benefit https://www.pcgamer.com/motherboards-with-killer- | network-ada... | rzzzt wrote: | "Application offloading" was one of the terms I tried when | searching for it, and got this as a result - not the same | thing, but similar: https://www.academia.edu/10225597/Putti | ng_it_on_the_NIC_A_ca... | rasz wrote: | https://pcper.com/2007/03/bigfoot-networks-killer- | nic-k1-and... | teekert wrote: | My home server is about 70W, meaning about 150EUR a year (~0.20 | eur/kWH). So about 12EUR a month. For one of my biggest | hobbies. It's fun, but it also runs WireGuard, 3 NextCloud | installs, Home Assistant and Mosquitto, 2 MineCraft servers, a | FoundryVTT instance, samba, sabnzbd, Unify Controller, an Nginx | static site, LibreSpeed, VaultWarden and soon a Django site. Oh | and a virtual desktop (vnc) I can always leave running with | stuff open. | | Do I need all of that? Meh, but it's not bad value for money- | wise IMHO. Perhaps mostly because I just enjoy it. | | Edit: of course the thing itself was also quite expensive but | not much more than a decent NAS which I think is a must for | many people anyway. | ta988 wrote: | Yes we should stop chastising people like that. You have long | hair, you use more water, shampoo and drying. You drink | coffee how many wh for that cup and its content. We could | always find something in others where they consume more. My | neighbors keep all their lights on almost all the time in | every room. The other one has AC on all day to full power | even when it is cooler outside... So complaining that someone | uses a 50w/70w device for their hobby... meh . However I | still believe we and the manufacturers should work to reduce | idle power and consumption in general. | teekert wrote: | Oh I never felt chastised... before... | | I mean I agree with not wasting energy of course, but what | we're talking about here is really nothing compared to | driving a car or making a couple of pots of tea a day, for | example. I refuse to feel chastised! | josephcsible wrote: | > (~0.20 eur/kWH) | | Are such high electricity prices common in Europe? That's | higher than it is in 49 of the 50 US states (assuming 0.20 | EUR = 0.24 USD, and with Hawaii being the exception). | zbrozek wrote: | That's cheaper than California! | cinntaile wrote: | In Western Europe at least this is quite common. Mostly | because politicians have discovered this as a great tax | resource. | AnssiH wrote: | I assume it varies a lot by region. 0.12 EUR/kWh for me | (Finland, inc. transmission and tax). | selectodude wrote: | Electricity in the EU is really really expensive. That | person is actually paying below average rates. | teekert wrote: | I never thought about it, as far as I know it's been stable | like this for years now... Gas is getting more and more | expensive though. | mixermachine wrote: | 0.30 Euro per kW/h in Germany | binkHN wrote: | > but it also runs ... MineCraft servers | | At least you have your priorities straight :P ! | gravypod wrote: | You can dynamically turn on and off things with MaaS and | monitor power though most UPSs. | cortesoft wrote: | My solar panels on my roof generate about 10KW/h more than I | use. I can bank credits with the grid, but can never cash them | out, so electricity is basically free for me. | setBoolean wrote: | I have a HomeKit power plug that is able to measure the power | usage. It sits before most of my living room devices including: | | 2x OG HomePods (Standby) - 55" Philips OLED (Standby) - Hue | Bridge 2. Gen (Running) - ATV 4K 1.Gen (Standby) - Netatmo | Weather Station (Running) - Linksys MR8300 OpenWrt 21.02 | (Running) - Home Server (i5-6600, 16GB DDR3, 2x 256GB 850 EVO, | 1Gb USB3 Ethernet Adapter as second NIC, Running) | | Reading with all devices combined is 35-40W. | ab3rC1te wrote: | You know you could just go buy an alternator and rig yourself | up your own infinite power supply. Depends on the Amps of the | alternator. | rasz wrote: | let me introduce you to "My PlayHouse" | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jhwj_aCEYc0&list=PLS2odYzlao... | fun stuff starts at 5:00 | specialist wrote: | Why not? Every one needs a hobby. | | Another benefit to Stapelberg's noodling is setting | expectations. | | Imagine you're bootstrapping a municipal ISP or mid-sized org. | Dealing with vendors and products for the first time. What's | reasonable? Who knows? Having these projects be a reality check | is awesome. | philjohn wrote: | There is a middle ground - either an Intel Atom or Intel | Celeron based server - typically use around 10w and you still | get niceties like SATA and even PCIe | easygenes wrote: | Also plenty of slightly more capable laptop class SKUs that | are in this ballpark. | vladvasiliu wrote: | Can you still find "desktop" motherboards to go with them? | | A long time ago, I remember there being desktop MBs for the | Pentium M. | londons_explore wrote: | For an always running thing, choosing a laptop | motherboard is a nice way to guarantee all the power | saving features will work properly. | | Most desktop motherboards won't allow the PCI express bus | to sleep for example, using an extra ~4 watts, $8 per | year in eco-friendly countries. Across the ~10 years your | NAS will probably sit in a cupboard, that's $80, which | isn't an awful lot, but probably would have let you buy a | bigger SSD or hard drive which would have had more | utility. | vladvasiliu wrote: | That's true, but then again I wouldn't be comfortable | with a single-disk NAS... | | However, for running random VMs, etc, I think a laptop is | quite a good proposition. | ttsiodras wrote: | If you are OK with external USB drives, I did just that with | my Atomic PI [1] (Atom-based, 35$ SBC, 3.5W idle, running | Debian on its internal EMMC, with two external USB drivers in | ZFS-mirror configuration). | | [1] https://www.thanassis.space/atomicpi.html | philjohn wrote: | You can also get rackmount servers in 1U format with Atom | CPU's that support 4 3.5" drives, e.g. | https://www.broadberry.co.uk/intel-atom-rackmount- | servers/cy... | iforgotpassword wrote: | > who don't bat an eye on the perspective of having a home | server, sucking up electricity 24/7. | | Maybe they need it? A router isn't a home server. But even if, | why do you keep your power efficient router running 24/7? You | could turn it off when you're not home to save even more | energy. | | > a full-fledged PC (probably consuming like x100 the power | | Maybe do some research before claims like these. He states this | pc idles at 48W. Please show me a router capable of handling | 25gbit/s that consumes 0,5W at idle. | | > how would you build a "something" that monitors the network | for packets sent to powered-off machines, then somehow caches | the request, powers the destination machine On, and finally | lets the request continue to its target? | | That's what "wake on LAN" is for. | yakubin wrote: | _> But even if, why do you keep your power efficient router | running 24 /7? You could turn it off when you're not home to | save even more energy._ | | You jest, but I turn off my router for the night and each | time I leave home for more than a day. Not just router to be | exact, everything that's connected to a power strip goes | down, as I turn off all the power strips. (Not OP.) | stefan_ wrote: | Not a fan of the "turning the power strips off" method. | Power supply failures are the number one reason why | expensive electronics turn to bricks and subjecting them to | the large inrush current that happens on the primary side | every time you do the mechanical switch thing is a great | way to significantly accelerate that process. Penny wise, | pound foolish kind of thing. | yunohn wrote: | What do you mean? Things that don't have an in-built | switch, are meant to be fine hot plugging and as such, | controlling via a power strip is fine. | yakubin wrote: | That's the primary method of turning embedded devices on | and off though. :) During development it's done around | the clock and noone bats an eye. Rule of thumb: if a | device doesn't have a power button, it's fine to turn off | using the power strip. | yownie wrote: | I'd assume because development process doesn't need to | deal with repercussions of accelerated power supply | degradation | elric wrote: | I have physical switches on or near every outlet. Anything | that's not actively being used gets turned off. With the | exception of my oven and hob, because those are nearly | impossible to reach. I use roughly 2kWh/day. This approach | probably doesn't make much sense if you're using an order | of magnitude more power. But it makes sense for me. | a2tech wrote: | Crazy. My wife and I used 619 kWh last month | nixgeek wrote: | We were at 5MWh last month, so it's all relative. Don't | feel bad. | liketochill wrote: | That is impressive! Did you do that on a 200A 120/240V | service? | | What is your load? Ac? | [deleted] | nixgeek wrote: | It's 240V/400A split-phase service, PNW, around | $0.11/kWh. Air conditioning is a big part of it when the | temperatures are high. Also charging multiple bEV, a lot | of 24x7 loads: half-dozen fridges, a couple large | freezers, wine cellar, about 1kW of IT+AV equipment, etc. | heartbreak wrote: | Not the person you were replying to, but my June | statement lists 1,800 kWh. I'm in a two-bedroom apartment | in Texas. The primary consumer of power by far is AC, | which is kept at 68 degrees in the summer (partly for | temperature, partly for humidity). My effective rate | after all the fees was $0.11/kWh. | 83457 wrote: | Why not just go all in and shut off at breakers? | elric wrote: | Breakers are not made for very frequent on/off cycles. | They won't last as long as a light switch for instance. | I've never seen a light switch wear out, but I have seen | breakers wear out (at which point they trip very easily, | and eventually seem to just permanently fail open). | oriolid wrote: | Fridge. | herewego wrote: | Then don't flip the fridge breaker. | detaro wrote: | Plenty places don't have a separate breaker for that. | adrian_b wrote: | "probably consuming like x100 the power" is greatly | exaggerated. | | A typical PC might have an idle power consumption of less than | 50 W, while a very small computer with ARM little cores might | have an idle power of 2 ... 3 W, so at most the power | consumption ratio would be 20. | | However even that is not realistic because a computer or | appliance with less than 3 W power consumption will not be able | to route 10 Gb/s or faster links and it will struggle even with | multiple 1 Gb/s ports. | | A dedicated router appliance able to route 10 Gb/s or faster | links will probably have an idle power of around 10 W or even | more. | | For routing only 1 Gb/s links, you can use among the standard | PC's a NUC-like model, which will have an idle power | consumption between 5 W and 10 W, quite close to a dedicated | appliance. This is actually what I am using for my own Internet | router/firewall (which also runs many other services, e.g. DNS | server and proxy, NTP, e-mail, HTTP server and proxy etc.) with | 1 external 1 Gb/s port and 4 internal 1 Gb/s ports (4 of the 5 | ports are made with USB to Ethernet adapters). | | Some of the more recent NUC or similar computers have multiple | Thunderbolt ports or 10 Gb/s USB ports, so those can be used to | route multiple 10 Gb/s links (using Ethernet adapters), with an | idle power of around 10 W, similar to any equivalent commercial | routers. | | For 25 Gb/s Ethernet links, a commercial router is unlikely to | be much cheaper or to consume much less than a standard PC. | goodpoint wrote: | > For 25 Gb/s Ethernet links, a commercial router is unlikely | to be much cheaper or to consume much less than a standard | PC. | | EDIT: I linked to a switch by mistake. | | This router has 12 x 10G SFP+ and 2 x 25G SFP28 ports and | costs $595 | | It appears to be routing between 13 to 39Gbps depending on | the rule complexity. | | https://mikrotik.com/product/ccr2004_1g_12s_2xs#fndtn- | specif... | realityking wrote: | That's a switch, not a router. Much simpler hardware. | | Here's a MikroTik Router with 28 Gbit/a throughput: | https://mikrotik.com/product/CCR1036-8G-2SplusEM | | $1300 and up to 73W | coder543 wrote: | That's a bit of an odd example to choose. | | This[0] has a $600 MSRP, with twelve 10Gbps ports and two | 25Gbps ports. It's ~32W before you add the SFP+ modules, | and upwards of 50W if you have all modules populated. | | In the benchmarks they list, this can provide somewhere | on the order of 13Gbps to 40Gbps of routing, depending on | exactly what you're doing. (Smaller packets will lower | these numbers, but if you care about _bandwidth_ you 're | unlikely to be worried about smaller packets... at that | point, you probably care more about kpps.) | | [0]: https://mikrotik.com/product/ccr2004_1g_12s_2xs | ikiris wrote: | the benchmark you even link shows absolutely abysmal | performance curves, dropping down into even half a gig | perf for small packets single stream. | coder543 wrote: | Calling any benchmark "abysmal" requires a point of | comparison, and you have provided none... so it doesn't | really encourage good discussion. What's the point of | your comment? It seems to just be a way of insulting | someone else's product. | | Which comparably priced router are you thinking of that | has a "non-abysmal" performance curve for small packet | bandwidth? | realityking wrote: | Fair. It was the first router I found on their site with | listed throughout >= 25 Gbit/s. | [deleted] | artemist wrote: | This is a switch and switching is hardware accelerated. | While you can theoretically route with this this, it is | incapable of routing at gigabit speeds, let alone 10 | gigabit speeds, once you need even a few rules. | [deleted] | [deleted] | tomnipotent wrote: | SFP requires less energy than RJ45, only 0.7W/port. The | MikroTik 4-port CRS305-1G-4S+IN draws 10-18W. | logifail wrote: | > MikroTik 4-port CRS305-1G-4S+IN | | I have two of these at home, they're neat little bits of | kit. | | They're fanless and therefore silent, which is fine until | you realise you want to do 10GbE over existing copper | cables with something like Mikrotik's S+RJ10 adapter. Then | the temps start to rise... | | So, I've decided to go completely to fibre, even if it | means opening up the walls of the house. Just bought a job | lot of used ConnectX-3 cards off ebay. | walterbell wrote: | How do you obtain custom lengths of fibre cables that | work with ConnectX-3? | tomnipotent wrote: | Use fs.com, their generic cables work with MikroTik no | issue and they do custom orders. | eqvinox wrote: | The ConnectX-3 cards are not vendor locked in any way. | (And even if they were, that'd only affect the SFP, not | the cable.) | lostlogin wrote: | > ConnectX-3 cards off ebay. | | Those cards are so good. I got a few after seeing them | rated in r/homelab and haven't looked back. The Synology | took one and it was about 1/10th the price the official | Synology one was. | bcrl wrote: | That's not entirely true. SFP power consumption depends on | the type of SFP. A 10Gbps DWDM SFP+ might draw 1.8W of | power. The why for this is actually quite interesting: the | lasers used in DWDM SFPs have much more stringent | requirements for temperature stability to ensure the light | emitted doesn't drift out of spec. In order to achieve that | temperature stability, they use a built in peltier to pump | heat away from the laser and control the temperature. | They're quite the marvel of modern engineering! | oasisbob wrote: | It would have been fun to be a fly on the wall at Cisco | when they first realized people were jamming devices with | heaters in SPF sockets. | eqvinox wrote: | Cisco didn't "realize" this was happening, they | specified, had manufactured, and sold the very SFPs the | GP post is describing. SFP slots in routers are designed | with this thermal load in mind. | | Which is also why plugging a large amount of DWDM optics | into a datacenter switch is a bad idea. Datacenter | switches are _not_ designed with this in mind. You run | into risks of both overheating the switch as well as | overloading the PSUs. A small number of high-power optics | ain't gonna break the switch though. | | And: 10Gbase-T SFPs have horrendous power consumption, | even worse than DWDM SFPs. At these speeds, the signal | over copper is mostly mush, and the PHY contains a none- | too-trivial analog & digital signal processor. Which, | again, is where limitations for 10Gbase-T SFP usage come | from. If at all possible, avoid this shit -- there's | absolutely no reason to have 10Gbase-T inside a rack, for | example. Just use DAC cables or SR optics. | tomnipotent wrote: | Except no one is using DWDM for homelabs, as it's usually | used for longer distances. The peltier cooler is | definitely cool, though. | bcrl wrote: | True. On general principle I would recommend folks invest | in single mode rather than multimode fiber for permanent | installs, as the price delta on SFPs is low enough these | days. Multimode is a complete pain as it needs to be | upgraded for higher speeds every decade. If it's just a | couple of patch cables in a home lab, it doesn't matter, | but if it's run through a wall... | naikrovek wrote: | Have you measured how much electricity a computer doing routing | consumes? I bet it's a lot less than you think. | | Also measure how much a good, high-bandwidth router uses. I bet | that is a lot more than you think. | | the "why do this" question for me comes about entirely because | of the continual manual intervention that is needed for | solutions like this. just not worth it, to me. | jacoblambda wrote: | I mean I have and my router is on average drawing around 15W | but it also isn't remotely close to being able to hit 25Gbps. | I don't think 50W (apparently the draw of this router) is | unrealistic for a 25Gbps router by any means. | unixhero wrote: | Maybe they have money and they find that spending money on | homelabbing is worth the effort. And really it isn't THAT | expensive either. I for one don't bat an eye on my USD200 | yearly homelab electricity cost. | | Of course if one wishes to perfectly optimize everything then | having a homelab might well wasteful. | sponaugle wrote: | Indeed every case is unique. My home lab runs about ~4kw all | the time, which end up being about 2.8mWh/month. Here in | Oregon that ends up costing $340/month. | | This is a brand new house, and as soon as I get permits | approved I'm adding 21kw of solar which will help offset | that. | baybal2 wrote: | What a lot of other people don't realise: | | - There is no such thing as a 25gbps home router. | | What's currently on the market is a very serious overkill ever | for 10gbps. | great-potential wrote: | In terms of CPU it is not totally overkill if you're using an | IPS/IDS, bare in mind you'll also be disabling most of the | network card offloading in a full fledged firewall and that | will ultimately result in consuming slightly more CPU cycles. | hocuspocus wrote: | > I guess some people around the world have quite cheap utility | bills! | | Or they work at Google and don't really have to care. | | Electricity is not particularly cheap in Switzerland, but not | particularly expensive either (nothing like Germany for | instance). If running a home lab is your hobby, why not. There | are plenty of hobbies that are a lot more expensive. | ianai wrote: | The machine's clearly massive overkill for routing. Another | commenter points out it typically runs around 50w - and the | OP says they're also using it as a server in this thread. | pilif wrote: | Do you know of any smaller scale hardware capable of | routing 25Gbit/s? | dijit wrote: | FWIW: raspberry pis (the 4 series) sucks in 15w which is | why it's so bloody difficult to power them through standard | USB power adapters (which go up to 12w). | | So, not hundreds of times more power hungry, but definitely | 2-3x | ajsnigrutin wrote: | yep, which makes them a pain in the ass to efficiently | cool down without active cooling (=fans) | larschdk wrote: | My passively cooled RPi4 with 8GiB RAM + 1GiB/USB | ethernet dongle working as a 1Gb router never goes above | 50 degrees C (all-metal case from aliexpress). | geerlingguy wrote: | Just to note that's peak power consumption. They idle | between 1-4W, or if you're running a PoE HAT, 4-6W. | formerly_proven wrote: | A RPi is not equivalent to what most would use as a COTS | router, which includes a GbE switch and some kind of | modem (DSL or cable). The latter on its own needs a few | Watts. | geerlingguy wrote: | On the contrary, OpenWRT and a good CM4-based board | allows the Pi to run pretty well as a gigabit router :) | | https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2021/two-tiny-dual- | gigabit... | aj3 wrote: | That's not much of a router with just two ports and no | WiFi. | tssva wrote: | No CM4 and accompanying carrier board needed . A regular | RPi4 with a USB3 gigabit adapter makes for a good gigabit | home router. I have been using one as my home gigabit | router for the last 14 months without any issues. | t0mas88 wrote: | The problem is running it 24x7, then a small 50w is still | 438 Kwh each year. That's more than a 10% increase in | yearly use for a typical two person household... | true_religion wrote: | Then like another poster said, it all depends on how much | you pay for electricity and some people have quite low | cost electricity. | | For me that would be a $49 cost per year, or a cost of | little over $4 per month. | quaintdev wrote: | How about people power this stuff with renewalbles like | solar? | manbash wrote: | Now it's up to the person to decide whether increase in | living cost is worth it, which... is kinda normal. I | think I spend more money on other things that I take | enjoyment from. | t0mas88 wrote: | Sure, it's just that many people don't think about this | impact because 50W sounds low. | [deleted] | mirekrusin wrote: | Maybe having single bulky, but efficient server means | other laptops/whatnot will be used less which will cancel | out and be electricity negative at the end of the year. | JCharante wrote: | Aren't 60w lightbulbs still around? | labawi wrote: | Do you run your lightbulbs 24/7? | | If so, you should get a LED alternative. | maccard wrote: | That's very roughly $100/year, which is < 1/6th of the | cost of the _network cards_ in this build. | | My workstation bursts to 600w+ for 15-20 minutes at a | time when compiling, for comparison. | mirekrusin wrote: | For developer like me, I'm actually considering this | option, it would be great to have PC like this available | for some docker stuff as well, ie. MSSQL instance for | development (Azure MSSQL version that runs on M1 is shit | slow to the point it's unusable for development). Maybe | even some tests could be offloaded from dev machine to this | one etc. Would be nice to have single place for backups, | photo library etc. | angrais wrote: | Why not just use your development machine for | development? | | Also, why not use a remote server for deployment, | testing, and building docker images? Most roles I have | had offer such services (remote servers) as part of their | costing so wouldn't cost you time, money, or effort. | | I agree that having a single place to backup photos etc, | is important. I use an external SSD for such a purpose as | imo it's more useful to have it offline as I rarely add | data and it is less likely to be comprised, e.g., it my | machine was hacked. | bluedino wrote: | >> Why not just use your development machine for | development? | | He said the M1 versions of MSSQL performs terribly | great-potential wrote: | I think if the OP uses this only as a router it is indeed a | waste of power. | | What I would probably do is also use it as nas/workstation by | using virtualization, SR-IOV is now pretty standard on these | cards. | secure wrote: | I'm using the machine also as a server, so it replaces 2 | existing devices. In terms of power consumption, it's likely | only a small increase, if at all. | ianai wrote: | My only rub with that is - shouldn't the router be only a | router from a security perspective? Definitely combining | servers for home use does make sense though. | secure wrote: | Ideally yes. But with the resources needed for 25 Gbps, | not using one machine for multiple purposes seems | wasteful. The server only stores publically available | data, though, so not a big deal from a security | perspective. | ianai wrote: | What do you mean by resources required? expansion ports | on the mb? | great-potential wrote: | Yeah running your nas-bittorrent/firewall-router on the | same OS is clearly not something I would do, especially | that now you can use somrthing like proxmox for example | and virtualize your pfsense/opnsense instance. | AdrianB1 wrote: | I am using a home server with the same CPU and I am using | it for SQL, storage server and virtualization. In order to | do that I changed RAM to 32GB DIMMs, 64GB in total was not | enough and the CPU works just fine with 32GB DIMMS. The | platform is quite limited by the number of available PCIe | lanes, but without moving up to Threadripper (a lot more | expensive) there is no better option, Intel is in the same | place or worse. The good thing with Intel is that you can | use a CPU with integrated graphics and save the PCIe lanes | for the graphics card. | | My previous build (Ryzen 2700, 65W) had a great feature | until it was gone with a BIOS update: after installing | everything it worked with the graphics card removed. As I | always connected only remotely, it was not a problem but a | benefit. You can try and see what happens. | Datagenerator wrote: | Also, the user can use his freedom to build and do whatever | wished for. This tone of you shouldn't do this because some | COTS is available sounds very commercially driven. People | have the power to create another Google, we are not | powerless. | smolder wrote: | Yeah, I have an overpowered router PC (mostly in the | capabilites sense --its a low power passively-coolable Xeon), | but it also acts as a flash NAS, and hosts a few other | containerized services that I prefer are always-on, it's a | wireguard endpoint, etc. I've got a separate sometimes-on box | for other VMs and containers. That one hosts a windows VM | with a VFIO-attached GPU which my living room tv plugs into. | Altogether it's lots of computing power for home use but | draws relatively little at the wall. I'm pretty happy where I | landed in terms of overall utility versus TCO, using this | sort of consolidated-hardware approach. | IgorPartola wrote: | What kind of light bulb? :) | | A typical consumer router will take up something like 5-10 | watts. A PC will suck in 20-50. Remember that the PC will be a | lot more powerful so it'll spend most of its time with low CPU | usage. | | Say the worst case scenario: 45W difference. 45W * (24 * 30) / | 1000 = 32.4 kW*h/month. At $0.10 kWh rate that's $3.24/month, | less than a cup of Starbucks coffee. | mixermachine wrote: | Add HDDs and 10 GBit/s hardware and you surely reach 60 watts | or more idling. Many home labs also don't use the newest | hardware but old server hardware (add 10 - 40 watt idle). | | A NUC or other Laptop hardware on the other hand would be OK | to run. Maybe SSD raids are (financially) feasible for | everyday files in the near future. | | You are lucky to pay only $0.10. Here (Germany) I pay 0.30 | Euro per kW/h. About $0.36 dollars. | | I turned off my home NAS a few months back and partially | switched to VPS services (also because of the better | connection). | iforgotpassword wrote: | > Many home labs also don't use the newest hardware but old | server hardware (add 10 - 40 watt idle). | | Yes, but switching to newer, more efficient hardware is not | free, so you need to factor this in when considering a | switch. Also, in case you don't only care about your wallet | but also environmental impact it's getting even more | complicated, since manufacturing your new shiny toy | definitely is polluting the environment somewhere in Asia, | gets shipped via ship burning horribly dirty fuel in | international waters etc. | | If you don't have any use for the old hardware, chances are | it will end up burning on some open field somewhere in | Africa after local recyclers already extracted the good | stuff... | ClumsyPilot wrote: | "your new shiny toy definitely is polluting the | environment somewhere in Asia" | | Thats true whether I use dropbox or my own server | foolmeonce wrote: | > A typical consumer router will take up something like 5-10 | watts. | | You demonstrate a good worst case, but the article writer | wants to use more than 10 gb/s so he can't actually use your | typical router, he can have 15 gb/s with the MikroTik | CCR2004-1G-12S which has an unknown idle W and a max around | 50W. | | Looking into the problem, I can't really determine why I | should upgrade to 10 or 25 gb/s, but if I wanted to do so now | I would rather buy components I could reuse than buy a router | that will be inefficient for its entire service life. | j1elo wrote: | Oh my I wish those $0.10 kWh... in here we have 3 prices | through the day (depends on what time it is), and the | cheapest one is already higher than that :) | | Anyway I did the math and it would be $7/month. More than | double your estimation, but still not horrendous. Although | for that range of prices one might be able to find a managed | instance machine in some cloud provider... | | (edit: somewhere in the process I lost track of the fact this | was a price _difference_ calculation, so it's adding $7 to | whatever was already the cost with a more power efficient | machine, which ofc. depends on number and type of HDs and | other equipment) | ta988 wrote: | Would it be efficient to store power when price is low? | tgragnato wrote: | The real difference is in latency: I tend to use the same | operator on the fixed and mobile line, with Wireguard. SSH, | SMB and Matrix respond almost as if you were in LAN. | | If I add the cost for bandwidth and storage of a data | center, then the economic choice is obvious. | f3d46600-b66e wrote: | My Netgear access point consumes 7-8watts. My home server, with | 2*12TB drives, 2*3TB, and 1nvme, which also acts as NVR (for | POE cameras), recording 24x7, and which also acts as owncloud | server (and few other things) consumes 40-50watts (and it | includes a 10gbps SFP+ fiber). It also includes a wireless card | and acts as an access point. It also runs a few VMS, continuous | integration server, pihole and other stuff. | | This is not x100, it's x7 times. And the utility is much much | higher. | | Before, i was using amd Apu, and it consumed 20-30 watts, but | did not support AES-NI, which made the disk access limited to | 60MB/s :-( | | It's way cheaper to run everything at home than paying for the | cloud, even if u include electricity cost. | | It's about $50/year for electricity (1 watt 24/7 =~ $1 per | year) | vbezhenar wrote: | > In fact this is a nice place to ask: how would you build a | "something" that monitors the network for packets sent to | powered-off machines, then somehow caches the request, powers | the destination machine On, and finally lets the request | continue to its target? Has this been tackled anywhere? There | must be tons of people wanting a homeserver but living in | places where electricity has a considerable cost... | | IP protocol does not guarantee delivery. So you don't have to | cache request. Just power on the machine, client will retry | sending the packets until the machine is powered on and can | respond. Just make sure that there's no gap between networking | available and http server is still starting on. | secure wrote: | I have built such a gateway for SSH: it accepts the | connection, powers on the target machine if needed, then | forwards traffic. | | https://github.com/stapelberg/zkj-nas- | tools/blob/master/wolg... | | The advantage over just catching any packets is that an SSH | connection is authorized, so less noisy in terms of undesired | wakeups. | secabeen wrote: | Apple has this. It's called Boujour sleep proxy, and it | allows a always-on device like a Airport or AppleTV to | claim the IP address of a sleeping Mac, waking it with a | WoL packet when traffic for that device comes in. It's | probably pretty useful, but is annoying on a managed | network, as it spams my arpwatch system every time the IP | is transferred between devices. | [deleted] | allenrb wrote: | When I was younger, 100W _was_ a light bulb. We've come a long | way. :-) | [deleted] | juancb wrote: | I've used managed power strips for data center applications in | the past. The strips have individually addressable power ports | and a web interface, telnet, as well as SNMP support. They've | been around for decades and are the solution to your problem of | needing to remotely manage the power state of power hungry | devices. | | If you set your servers to always power on after power is | restored you can control them with that device. | | There's also Wake On Lan (WoL) support in a lot of systems, | where you can use a correctly crafted "magic frame" to wake up | any machine that received it. | melling wrote: | He claims one of his goals is to be power efficient | | "The PC consumes about 48W of power when idle (only management | ..." | | https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=97&t=3 | | " How much electricity does an American home use? In 2019, the | average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential | utility customer was 10,649 kilowatthours (kWh), an average of | about 877 kWh per month" | iforgotpassword wrote: | Ok so what am I missing here? In Germany a typical four | person household is 2000kwh a year. Surely air conditioning | can't make up for such a difference? Everybody already | switched to electric cars? | tzs wrote: | That's about 170 kWh/month. I'm in the US and use around | 450-500 kWh/month in the summer, which is my time of | minimal use because it is warm enough to not need heating | and usually not so warm as to need air conditioning. | | I'm curious why such a big difference. Here's what I'm | using in a household of one. | | 1. Kitchen appliances: Fridge, microwave, toaster, oven, | dishwasher. The first three are used daily. The oven and | dishwasher once per week. I'll also occasionally use a | bread machine and an electric kettle, maybe a couple times | a month. | | 2. Washing machine and dryer. 4-6 times per month. | | 3. A 2017 27" iMac, a Raspberry Pi 3, cable modem, TP-Link | A7 router, and two TP-Link SG108E switches. A USB hub and a | case for a couple external SSDs. An external monitor. | | 4. A 55" LCD TV which is used a couple hours a day, and an | A/V receiver which is always on but usually idle. A couple | streaming boxes (Fire Stick 4K, Xfinity Flex). | | 5. iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and Surface Pro 4 chargers | charging those devices. | | 6. Indoor lighting. It is almost all LED. The only | exceptions are the lights in the fridge and dryer, one bulb | each in the attic and crawl space that I forgot about when | switching to LED. | | 7. An outdoor security light in back that is on overnight. | I'm not sure about its power consumption, but these are | typically under 100 W, which would be 24 kWh/month during | the summer. | | (I'm a bit puzzled by that light. I'm still using the same | bulb that was there when I bought the house, giving the | bulb on "on" time since I've owned it of around 56000 | hours. That's quite a bit longer than expected for every | kind of light bulb that I can think of that this might be. | Only LED should approach that and definitely is not LED). | | 8. Well pump and water heater. The well pump runs maybe a | couple times a day for maybe 5 minutes at a time, and would | account for at most a few kWh/month. I know the water | heater is a beast--but I think it only runs a little more | frequently than once a day. | | 9. A couple box fans in windows at night to blow out hot | air. They are 50 W each. Maybe 50 kWh/month. | | 10. Miscellaneous. Charger for rechargeable AA and AAA NiMH | batteries. Electric toothbrush. A Google Home Mini as a | kitchen timer. An Echo Dot to control lights. a Hue hub for | the lights. Charger for the batteries for some cordless | tools (drill, string trimmer, hedge trimmer) that are all | used rarely. | denimnerd42 wrote: | Have you seen the size of an American refrigerator compared | to European? | | We use 2kwh a month here in August. | [deleted] | zrail wrote: | My house is very atypical for my area of Michigan. It's all | electric with a geothermal ground source heat pump for | heating and cooling and electric water heaters. In addition | it has (or rather had) two of these geothermal units and | two water heaters for two separate spaces. We also have a | plug-in hybrid vehicle that we charge at home. | | Outdoor temperatures in the summer range from mid 70s F to | low 100s F and humidity is almost always above 60%, hitting | 90% for weeks at a time. | | Our electric usage in all but the coldest months of the | year is around 2200kwh per month. I expect this to go down | somewhat because we just upgraded one of the geothermal | units and replaced the other with a gas furnace and | inverter AC unit. | lttlrck wrote: | It looks closer to 3.5Mwh: | | http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/average-household- | electricity... | | But still that's _far_ lower than the US at 11Mwh. Maybe A | /C and home size accounts for most of it. | | We're a family of 3 and on track for around 8Mwh this year. | We only use AC on the hottest days (Southern Californian | climate so it's quite manageable throughout the year), | water and dryer are gas - but I have a homelab which could | be optimized. | iforgotpassword wrote: | I got that figure from my last bill, they always add | graphs and comparisons, like a bar chart displaying usage | of a typical 1, 2, 3, 4 person household and then your | usage. But maybe they show lower values here to get you | to try and save more. | | I'm in a two person household and usually clocking in at | 700-900kwh, and that's with a 24/7 home server drawing | 30W, a rpi for kodi that I keep running, dish washer, | washing machine, induction stove. No ac, no dryer, no | microwave, hot water and central heating with natural | gas. Also no more desktop pc since around 2014. | BenjiWiebe wrote: | I don't have the numbers, but air conditioning can suck up | a LOT of energy. I'm pretty sure air conditioning would be | (in our household) the single biggest energy user. | AdrianB1 wrote: | My home server using a very similar configuration (same CPU, a | lot less potent network) is what enables me to work from home, | making a living, so the cost of electricity is compensated by | the gas saved on commuting. I am also in process of adding | solar to my house, covering a lot more than this server. | | If people use old servers in the kilowatt range consumption for | fooling around having a server in the basement is questionable, | building something with low power in mind is nothing to | complain about. | bastardoperator wrote: | I have a very similar setup using a desktop as a router | (opnsense, 2 WAN, fibre/switch) and it has a single, yet fatal | flaw. | | The power button. When you lose power, and the power comes back | on, your router does not. If you are away, you must physically | turn it back on. | secure wrote: | I describe the relevant UEFI option in | https://michael.stapelberg.ch/posts/2021-07-10-linux-25gbit-... | :) | fuster wrote: | Most (all?) PCs should have a BIOS option to always restore | power after loss. | alexymik wrote: | You can usually change this in the BIOS (or equivalent). Look | for "Power on after AC loss" or similar. | Bud wrote: | The real story here is how great the internet service can be now | in a civilized country if you don't let Comcast have monopolies | and ban local internet cooperatives and coast along selling the | same service for 15 years while raising prices. | | 25Gbps symmetric for about $70/month. That's significantly less | than I pay Comcast for its crappy 900Mbps down/40Mbps up service. | nixgeek wrote: | At least in PNW the service isn't 900/40 any more, it's | advertised as "1.2Gbps" and the profile actually seems to be | 20% over that, I've seen 1.5Gbps or 170-180MB/sec downstream | performance recently. Upstream is still <= 50Mbps and otherwise | agree with your comment that the U.S. is falling behind in | price-throughput on domestic internet services versus many | other developed nations. | walrus01 wrote: | Upstream on cable like that will be sub 50 Mbps because | they're very intentionally only using a small number of rf | channels on the coax for upstream. This is why in my opinion | docsis3 is putting lipstick on a pig and is only a short term | stop gap solution. The better end state is proper SM fiber to | each house. | wormslayer666 wrote: | There have always been regional variations in this; I've had | the same 1.2GBps plan in a few states now and it only ever | got close to that number in the one where Fios was an option. | | Comcast's only innovation in the last few years has been to | add data caps to residential fiber service (my 300mb/s "1.2 | GBps" is capped at 1.4TB/mo). | Bud wrote: | Let's please not further the idea that it's acceptable to | quote only downstream speed when citing Internet speeds. | | Doing that just leads to 20 more years of Comcast killing | the concept of modern Internet service for Americans. Cite | both numbers. | nixgeek wrote: | We've just been paying a $30/mo upcharge for unlimited data | (removal of overage charges). Basically because it's more | predictable than the $10 for every 50GB overages. A few | months we've had 4-5TB through the service and Comcast | doesn't seem to have slowed us down or charged more. | underscore_ku wrote: | 1Gb/s in Romania is 10$/month | throwawayswede wrote: | That's cronyism for you. | gunapologist99 wrote: | I feel the pain. I pay $80/mo for 200Mb/s down. | | But, still, installing fiber is just expensive. | | Much more expensive than almost anything else, and requires | skill and experience to terminate the connections, and that's | even overlooking any regulatory hurdles of digging along the | right-of-way, private and public land ownership issues, the | costs of the equipment, and the fragility of the fiber itself | once installed. | | None of those costs really scale. In fact, they increase | linearly as the pool of available installers decreases, and | that's not even talking about the cost of connecting that fiber | to anything on the other end. | bluedino wrote: | We have a couple fiber companies in our town (USA), and we have | been shopping for internet. Currently we have fiber from AT&T. | | One is over a mile down the road and they want $90,000 to | connect and then $1750 a month for 1gbps. Another company is | two blocks away, they will only charge $8,000 to connect and | it's $1,550 a month for the same speed. | | Problem is there aren't many other companies in the area that | want service, so we would end up paying all the buildout costs. | The other business are small retail, restaurants and shops that | don't need more than coax (150/20 or whatever for $79/month) | from Spectrum. | xupybd wrote: | I'm in New Zealand, a small island nation. I have 1gbps for | around $70 USD per month. The install was free. I get a VoIP | phone and Prime video subscription included. | | Most of my devices are wireless so I really don't take | advantage of the speed. | timClicks wrote: | Which ISP are you with? | xupybd wrote: | 2 Degree's. They bundled it all with my cell plan. | hackcasual wrote: | I hit ~400mbps on my pixel 4a's wifi with 802.11ac in a | moderately congested environment. With WiFi 6 I would | probably saturate | Jnr wrote: | I pay about 17 USD for 1 Gbps in Europe. | [deleted] | RKearney wrote: | I'm sure the fact that Germany has a 566% larger population | density and is 96.19% smaller than the United States has a lot | to do with a countries ability to bring 25Gbps internet to its | citizens. | hda111 wrote: | Internet in Germany is really bad and expensive compared to | Switzerland and even to the rest of Europe. In Germany fiber | to the home is maybe 1-2% of all internet connections. Most | fiber providers in Germany offer only artificial asymmetric | connections and are very expensive. | nix23 wrote: | >I'm sure the fact that Germany | | Sorry to disappoint you, but it not Sweden or Germany but | Switzerland...Germany has bad internet too, but hey that | mistake happens even to the best ones (like Bush Junior) | RKearney wrote: | Not a disappointment at all. I see now that it is indeed | Switzerland. The mention of the Germany based IX upgrading | to 25Gbps towards the end of the article threw me off. | | But Switzerland has a 504% larger population density and | 99.56% smaller land area as compared to the United States | so my point still stands. | gspr wrote: | This is indeed great, but keep in mind that this story is about | one of the well-known greatest: Init7. | | They're well-known as a for-geeks-by-geeks service. I was | massively impressed by them when I lived in CH. | m463 wrote: | I think I priced it recently and it was $499/mo (+ hidden | upcharges) for 1 gig. their lowest price was $65/month for 35/5 | XIVMagnus wrote: | I left comcast for at&t fiber, paying $60/month for 1year. If I | learned anything since then is to make sure you attempt to | leave and they will start calling you with better offers..all | of a sudden lol | walrus01 wrote: | Solving the last mile facilities based isp problem in detached | houses in the USA and Canada is a hard one. In most places with | aerial Telecom and power infrastructure, you will have three | things coming to a house. Electricity, obviously. And then | whatever is the local phone company, and the local incumbent | cable TV company. | | If you're unlucky enough to live in a place where the phone | company is operating old degraded DSL on copper phone lines, | and doesn't care to overbuild it with single mode fiber for | GPON, and the cable TV company is also something similarly | large and slightly evil like Comcast, you're almost out of | luck. This is a political and regulatory problem that allows | the local franchise agreement for the phone company and cable | tv company to be renewed in perpetuity without demanding solid | metrics for improvement of service. | | If you are very fortunate, there will be an entirely single | mode fiber-based third-party provider which competes with the | previous two mentioned things. Doing what's called and | "overbuild" as a new entrant for this is very capital intensive | and requires a lot of physical outside plant cabling work and | infrastructure at layer 1 in the OSI model. It also requires | appropriate cooperation from whichever local entity owns and | controls the wood utility poles (again, a political problem). | sschueller wrote: | The primary reason the cost for init7 is so low is that for | example in Zurich city the fiber network is owned by the city | (like water pipes and power lines) and paid for by the tax | payer. Any provider can provide their service over it. | | Places outside the city that don't have these kinds of fiber | connections aren't this lucky. | walrus01 wrote: | There are a number of county sized public utilities districts | in Washington state which are doing essentially the same | thing. These particular ones are also the last mile | electrical grid operator connected to some of the big | hydroelectric dams in the region. | foolmeonce wrote: | > paid for by the tax payer. | | Actually the Zurich build out was only financed by the tax | payer to be done by the electric company and Swisscom. | Internet providers must each have equal options to lease the | last mile from whoever built it out in a given city or town; | it isn't free. | kbenson wrote: | Yes and no. Local ISPs in the U.S. are also laying/stringing | their own fiber and providing cheap (cheaper than shown here) | service. They are starting to move into 10/25 gigabit speeds | too, as the costly part (running the fiber) doesn't do much | to limit the speed, you just have to update the equipment at | each end. | h0nd wrote: | If you do not live in an area covered by them (which is the | majority), it is the same as you say. Situation is not perfect | here, either. | sliken wrote: | Was hoping for similar but 10 gbit. Anyone know a nice | small/quiet linux box with 2x10 gbit for use as a router? | | I have a 8 port x 1gbit ubiquiti router, but ubiquiti seems to be | going downhill, and 8 port x 10gbit routers are pretty expensive. | My plan was a 2 port router and use vlan tagging to a 8+ port 10g | switch. That way I can have separate networks for trusted | ethernet, trusted wifi, untrusted ethernet, and untrusted wifi. | tyingq wrote: | I would go with a used SuperMicro A1SAI-2750F motherboard. It | comes with an Atom 8-core C2750 (20w TDP) and a single 8 lane | PCIe slot, but doesn't need active cooling. Supports ECC ram | too. There's a passive heatsink on the CPU that works fine. I | believe that would keep up with 2x10gb, be quiet, and power | efficient. | | They are $200 or so used on eBay. So not terribly expensive for | something that can push 10g. And it will fit in any Mini-ITX | case. | | Don't be put off by the "Atom" branding. The C2750 was no | slouch for its heyday. | eqvinox wrote: | Note the Atom C2xxx series is the one where Intel f*cked up | the LPC bus I/O drivers and it dies after a few years. Don't | buy them used unless you're comfortable soldering a resistor | to a clock line to extend its life. | | This is fixed in the C0 stepping of the CPU, but finding out | the CPU stepping is difficult even on new boards. | | (cf. https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/docum | ents... - this is AVR54) | deckard1 wrote: | I'd probably go with SuperMicro X10SDV-4C-TLN2F. It already | has 10GbE. Xeon D-1521 2x 10GbE ports | onboard 6x SATA3 ports Accepts ECC RDIMM DDR4 | (usually cheaper than UDIMM ECC) 1x PCIe 3.0 x16 | 1x M.2 slot | | There is one on ebay right now for $230 USD shipped. | | Also, if you're going for lower power consumption I believe | you can disable the IPMI and the 2nd 10GbE port if you don't | need it. There are other ways to reduce consumption too. Turn | off anything you can on the motherboard that you don't use | and use higher density DIMM sticks (and less of them, if you | can, e.g. 1x16GB rather than 2x8GB). Also worth paying | attention to the PSU's efficiency curve and making sure your | PSU is decent quality (reliable + 80+ gold). | eqvinox wrote: | The cheap ones (including the one you mentioned) are | useless because they have 10Gbase-T. You need SFP+ slots to | hook up your provider's fiber. | | Which is kinda sad too because implementing 10Gbase-T is | more expensive to implement _and_ more expensive to run | (because the 10Gb-T PHY burns power.) Sadly, there 's not | enough knowledge about this going around. | deckard1 wrote: | yes, well you can get a cheap transceiver for that. | You're still going to have to talk to something else and | that all goes out the window if you have existing copper | in your house or need to have wired devices (NAS, smart | TV, xbox, literally anything at all). You probably can't | even find a wifi AP that has SFP+ that doesn't cost you 3 | arms and 5 legs. | tyingq wrote: | >There is one on ebay right now for $230 USD shipped. | | Ah, yeah, that's a better deal with the 2x onboard 10Gbe. | traspler wrote: | I'd love to get something simple that could handle a 10Gbit | fiber7 connection and act as a 10Gbit Router & Switch in my | home. My skills and patience in this area are a bit limited so | going as deep as Michael is not something I could do with | confidence. Narrowing down the hardware to something that is | not only powerful enough, cheap enough, compatible with | something like OPNsense and available to normal humans has kind | of scared me off a bit. | opencl wrote: | AsRock makes an X570 ITX board with 2x10gig ethernet, the | X570D4I-2T. Though at $500 for the board alone the resulting | system is not going to be particularly cheap. | smolder wrote: | I would look at getting a Xeon-D board. They don't draw much, | come in mini ITX, and mine have 2x10GbE plus 2x1GbE built in, | for a price that's reasonable when you look at standalone NIC | costs. The CPU is soldered on, so the cost includes that, too. | zamadatix wrote: | Look for an old but not outdated enterprise switch and grab a | refurb. Most very large enterprises redo the network on roughly | a 7 year cycle and in 2014 10g uplinks with tons of 1g devices | was very standard. E.g. for less than 100$ you can usually pick | up an ers 4826gts on ebay which has 24 ports of 10/100/1000 | copper with POE+ capability and 2 1/10G SFP+ ports. It has | hardware switching and routing which will perform better than | software, particularly on latency. | | As far as noise 1u devices are usually a bit whiney even when | not pushing much air but that's usually fixed with 1 or 2 200mm | PC fans. | | You'll still likely need something with NAT, preferably | hardware NAT, for the actual internet handoff. Some of this | class enterprise device have NAT support (not the 4826) but | that'll usually be in CPU and perform not that great especially | if you have like a gig connection. Or if you want to go pure | software here any cheap mini PC with 2 gigabit Ethernet ports | should be able to handle NAT reasonably for gig internet or | less since it doesn't also have to do the 10g internal | route/switch on top. | blackcat201 wrote: | If anyone is interested in building 10Gb router on a budget you | can buy Mellanox OCP NIC with an adapter from OCP to PCIe for | around 5~30 USD ( depend on your location )[0]. I recently build | one 10G router with 4x10Gb, 2x1Gb ports for around 200 USD using | second hand PC. | | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkf3PkuKdOA | tohmasu wrote: | > Our network cards need PCIe 3.0, so that disqualifies 5 | chipsets right away: only the A520, B550 and X570 chipsets | remain. | | No, the linked Wikipedia page only shows the PCIe lanes connected | through the chipset and doesn't account for PCIe lanes provided | directly from supported CPUs. X470 supports CPUs which have PCIe | 3.0 and a board with x8/x8 mode like the ROG Strix X470-F | https://www.asus.com/microsite/motherboard/AMD-X470/ should work | just fine (and has no fan). | gigel82 wrote: | Damn, $70 / month for 25Gbps symmetric; meanwhile, we're paying | $130 / month for 1Gbps (400Mbps really) down / 40Mbps up in | Comcast monopoly-land in PNW. | rwmj wrote: | Here I am having just had FTTH installed, but capped to a mere | 160 Mbps. The main problem I am having is not the router (which | handles such a "slow" speed fine) but the wiring throughout the | house. It's all copper ethernet and because of the lengths and | the fact that the runs must go parallel to some mains electricity | cables, it tops out at 100 Mbps. I hope the poster has already | put fibre around his house. | secure wrote: | "The poster" (hey!) has put fiber around their house :) | | https://michael.stapelberg.ch/posts/2020-08-09-fiber-link-ho... | | https://michael.stapelberg.ch/posts/2021-05-16-home-network-... | great-potential wrote: | Well, hate to tell you but you'll be limited 10Gb/s with these | Intel cards because they require FEC. | secure wrote: | You mean 10 Gbit/s per link? Even on the 25 Gbit/s card? | | Where can I read more about FEC (forward error correction?) and | how that affects link speeds? | great-potential wrote: | Yes the transceivers recommended by Init7 (bidi-LR) do not | support FEC and you'll be running in degraded mode (according | to the controller datasheet), and I don't think this is | something that can be achieved by coding of the transceivers. | adamcharnock wrote: | What is the practical consumer (or even SME) use of a 10 or 25G | connection? | | As a consumer I'd definitely get it for the fun of it, but what | is the point in reality? | | We've just launched an ISP a couple of weeks ago here in Europe. | Peak bandwidth use is about 3mbps per customer, and customers | will download the same amount of data regardless of their plan. | | I acknowledge this could be lack of imagination on my part, but | the progression of bandwidth availability seems to be wildly | outstripping demand (at least when it comes to fibre | deployments). | | Perhaps someone living in SF with a 25G connection can disabuse | me of this notion. | baybal2 wrote: | > What is the practical consumer (or even SME) use of a 10 or | 25G connection? | | Remote file storage, leasing servers for things like icecream, | or basic HPC, self-hosting for a small business, even a small | DC can run off it. | tzs wrote: | At what speed do you start to run into limits on the server | side when it comes to remote file storage? | adamcharnock wrote: | Remote file storage I can just about see. But most consumers | are streaming content (certainly TV, but possibly | increasingly games), so where are all these multi-gigabyte | files coming from on average 20/30-year-olds laptop/iPad? I | don't think people are shooting _that_ much video, are they? | baybal2 wrote: | Renting storage, and accessing it over 10gbps at home may | be cheaper than building your own multi-tb storage rack. | adamcharnock wrote: | Absolutely. But from what I'm seeing, the average | consumer's need for storage space is decreasing not | increasing. | baybal2 wrote: | Average consumer? Internet companies are responsible for | a few percents of the labour market in some parts of the | world. | | Not so few people genuinely need gigabit+ internet for | work. | lbotos wrote: | is this the icecream you speak of? | https://github.com/icecc/icecream I've never heard of it so I | was intrigued. | baybal2 wrote: | Yes, so far a tool in a way better condition than distcc, | though both are very poorly maintained. | slumdev wrote: | Internally: | | Every once in a while, I move VM images between machines. Even | at 1Gbps, it's a drag to sit there and watch them transfer. Not | really a big deal, but it'd be nice to see them move faster. | | Externally: | | I back up my Google Drive periodically. 500GB takes a while to | transfer. | scandinavian wrote: | I would be very surprised if you could even break 2.5 gbps | towards google drive. Saturating 25 gbps to anything the peer | out of country would be basically impossible most places. | adamcharnock wrote: | I agree, and this is totally the kind of thing I would do | too. But I don't think this represents average consumer | behaviour. | vitus wrote: | > I back up my Google Drive periodically. 500GB takes a while | to transfer. | | Do you download the whole thing each time, vs just changed | files? | | Either way, (scheduled!) periodic backups sounds like a thing | that could happen over trough (well, while you're sleeping), | in which case a 200Mbps connection would be more than | adequate for your use case (~5.6 hours for 500GB). | | The numbers obviously scale linearly with the size of your | download (a common anecdote I hear re: people filling up TBs | of hard drives is via lots of RAW photos), so in that | scenario, you'd need to transfer 30-40TB overnight (8 hours) | in order to saturate a 10G uplink; you'd likely saturate hard | drive write speeds first, not to mention you'd need multiple | HDDs/SSDs connected to even store that much data in the first | place. | slumdev wrote: | It was a cinch when I had an always-on Windows box. I'd | make a request via Takeout, save it on my Drive, and the | Backup and Sync app would automatically download it to my | local copy of the drive. But that box is now running | Ubuntu, and I haven't gotten around to replacing Backup and | Sync with one of the other (non-free, non-Google) options. | crispyambulance wrote: | I can't imagine ANY reason that a private household would | actually need a 10G or 25G connection unless it's doubling as a | workplace and they're hosting servers. Even that seems like a | temporary stop-gap situation, get some rackspace in a | datacenter already! | | Maybe they're not selling enough 25G to their business | customers and they're trying to get private users onto 25G? | mjevans wrote: | For download? | | Working from home with large media assets of any sort. | | For upload? Yes, I need ANYTHING faster than Comcast's BS so | I can actually do any work OR even backups without killing my | ability to do other things. | adamcharnock wrote: | I can see that. Certainly if they already have the | infrastructure deployed then a residential usage pattern on | 10G is going to look identical to that on 1G (and I'd wager | identical to that on 100M in most cases). In which case they | can get more recurring revenue for likely only an increased | one-off cost. | lbotos wrote: | When I clicked through to the provider it looked like the | only difference between 1/10/25G was the setup cost. But I | might have mis-read. | rand846633 wrote: | Init7,OP's isp is a non profit | chinathrow wrote: | No, they are a regular for profit company. | detuur wrote: | Regardless, their monthly (annual actually) fees are the | same for 25G/25G as for 1G/1G. Only the setup fees are | higher, which they attribute to more expensive optics. | 10G/10G is completely identically priced to 1G/1G. | johnwalkr wrote: | I have 10G in Tokyo and I think it's about $60 USD per month vs | $40 for 2G. It's definitely overkill but it sure is nice to | download a 60GB steam game in a minute or two. | qeternity wrote: | The problem with 10g is that most servers aren't on 10g yet | and if you're transiting a peering connection of a smaller | ASN at some point, even that is likely not 10g | martinald wrote: | Agreed, I struggle to get anywhere close to 1gbit/sec apart | from Steam. | n3dm wrote: | This hardly is relevant to your internet speeds with steam | downloads. It is much more CPU dependent when you are | operating at such high speeds. | eqvinox wrote: | A modern CPU + NIC combination will be twiddling its thumbs | on a bulk download at 10G. There's a whole sleuth of | optimization and offload features between the NIC and the | CPU, and they work particularly well with a low number of | high bandwidth data streams. | | The real problem starts when you're doing lots of small | packets all over the place. Which is not something you'll | likely run into at home, ever. | n3dm wrote: | No, it's still nothing to do with that for steam. Its | their compression. | yakubin wrote: | I work from home and regularly need to download large files | from work servers. Several months ago I noticed that my | internal network was 100Mb/s, which was dreadful. Downloads of | 500MiB files would take tens of minutes, because Tomcat would | drop connections on such a slow download. And even without | dropped connections it generally took a long time to download | anything, and Zoom call quality was regularly degraded (I | sometimes heard my colleagues as androids and vice versa). I | fixed the issue and now I get the full 700M/s that my ISP | offers (and 1G/s internally over a Netgear switch for NFS | transfers). I could get a 1G/s, but it would cost me more and | 700M/s is fine for the most time. But sometimes to get a | shorter feedback loop on what I'm doing I could imagine getting | a 5G/s. I think it would be optimal. But 10G is clearly | overkill. | e12e wrote: | > I noticed that my internal network was 100Mb/s, which was | dreadful. Downloads of 500MiB files would take tens of | minutes, because Tomcat would drop connections on such a slow | download. And even without dropped connections it generally | took a long time to download anything, and Zoom call quality | was regularly degraded. | | Was you network setup broken? Did your firewall block ICMP? | Ancient servers like tomcat and apache should handle slow | networks in stride, even with modern updates - and 500MB at | 100mbps is 40 seconds? | | Now I can't imagine running 100mbps today for a home | network... So upgrading makes sense. But your problems | doesn't sound like they were caused by your lan _speed_. | ClumsyPilot wrote: | "Zoom call quality was regularly degraded" | | It sounds like something else was dodgy on your previous | network, surely Zoom cannot use up 100mb/s connection | yakubin wrote: | When one side sends data at 1Gb/s and the other receives at | 100Mb/s, it's worse than if the first side sent data at | 100Mb/s. Here's a description from Julia Evans: | <https://jvns.ca/blog/2018/07/12/netdev-day-2--moving-away- | fr...> | | Basically my ISP router would receive data at full speed, | while internally I would have a lot of dropped packets. | | Additionally, I usually use the web browser to view Jira or | copy files over NFS during calls, and I'm sure there are | some background apps contributing to the traffic as well. | | The one thing that fixed all my problems was reconfiguring | the network driver to set 1G bandwidth on my NIC instead of | the 100M that it set automatically. Yeah, Linux Desktop | problems... | iforgotpassword wrote: | > Basically my ISP router would receive data at full | speed, while internally I would have a lot of dropped | packets. | | This is not how this works. The other end of your zoom | call doesn't go "hey the person I'm talking to is on a | 700mbits line, so that's how much data I'll send." By | that logic you could extend this to the network of your | isp, which is probably 10 or 100gbits, so you should have | a lot of packet loss where the transition from 10gbits to | 700mbits happens. And it's not even clear how the other | peer could even know how fast your internet connection | is, or the internal network of your ISP. That is what | congestion control is for. Your peer can't know your | modem's connection speed nor your LAN's speed. Software | will simply observe how fast it can send data before | packet loss starts to happen. This obviously requires | that the there is some sort of feedback by the peer | you're talking to. If you're using TCP, the OS will do | that for you for free. With UDP, you have to implement | that logic yourself in your application. And that's why | it doesn't matter where the bottleneck is, it could very | well be somewhere "in the middle" between two ISPs. | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: | 10 Gbps can give you _some_ advantage when downloading big | games from a network that can support it on high end hardware. | | Games are competing for "who can eat the most storage", it | seems, and at 231 GB for CoD:MW (https://gamerant.com/pc-games- | file-size-hd-space-biggest-hug...), you'll wait over half an | hour before you can play with "only" a 1 Gbit connection. | | The bigger the game, the bigger the incentive to just re- | download when needed if you can do it fast, since your storage | is limited. | | The 10 -> 25 Gbps step is definitely just bragging rights, | which I'd call well deserved given the lengths you have to go | to to actually reach those speeds. | louwrentius wrote: | I really respect this build, the only thing that I don't like is | the power consumption at idle of ~50 Watt. I understand that this | is probably due to the used NICs but still. | | It might almost be interesting to setup a second router (a Pi4 | might do) for regular casual internet usage + VRRP and only turn | on this beast when more bandwidth is required. | | The 25Gbit machine would be the VRRP master and the Pi4 the | slave. | r1ch wrote: | One thing I've run into when building my own 10gbps router that I | didn't see mentioned - you probably need to disable power saving | / frequency scaling. The handling of packets is done in software, | so when you start a download and the flood of initial data comes | in at 10gbps, your CPU will still be running at 600 MHz and | unable to keep up. It ramps up within 5-50 milliseconds depending | on CPU, but for a TCP download the sender will have already | interpreted the dropped packets as congestion and reduced their | upload rate. | | You can monitor this with ethtool stats to see how many packets | the NIC dropped due to host buffers being full. | secure wrote: | In none of my tests did I need to change power saving settings. | My iperf3 transfers stayed at 10 Gbps throughout. | r1ch wrote: | You need to check your dropped packet statistics to know for | sure. iperf3 TCP over LAN will not see throughput affected by | a few dropped packets, a stream 100ms away may take longer to | recover. High bandwidth UDP testing with iperf3 should also | expose this, the first measurement will usually see dropped | packets. | bluedino wrote: | He was only using 15% of the CPU at max speed | r1ch wrote: | You can't measure the CPU at 1 second granularity to see this | problem, in fact measuring the CPU at the sampling rate | required may be enough to raise the CPU frequency :). ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-07-10 23:00 UTC)