netdev - Re: [E1000-devel] ixgbe: Unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520-DA2 NIC?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANj2Ebf_W9qkO38v9D4wLXMk0ekbbNBDZ8yoRR9E0mWq2i-6fw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:55:47 -0500
From:	Simon Chen <simonchennj@...il.com>
To:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] ixgbe: Unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s
 X520-DA2 NIC?

If short-range is fine for you, twinax is awesome...

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Chuck Anderson <cra@....edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:21:58PM +0000, Fujinaka, Todd wrote:
>> That's up to you. There's "locked" and there's "locked". I'm surprised
>> that Benny and Jesper haven't looked at the driver to see where the
>> messages come from.
>>
>> We have a short list of optical modules that have been tested with our
>> cards. The problem with standards is that there's always some wiggle
>> room and you won't know if something really works until you try it. No
>> matter how large the company, we are still constrained as far as what we
>> can do in a day and testing every module we can find just wasn't one of
>> the things that was approved for us to try.
>
> I don't buy that argument.
>
> We have Ethernet standards and we have IP standards and we have
> SFP/SFP+ standards.  Did you test your 1000Base-T copper Ethernet
> cards with every vendor of Ethernet hardware?  If not, did you lock
> them out to talk to only "pre-approved" Ethernet switches?  Would you
> have done so if there was a way to technically do so (perhaps via
> LLDP)?
>
> What about USB keyboards/mice?  Maybe Intel's chipsets can be locked
> so only Intel USB keyboards work...and then we can all stop buying
> Intel hardware.
>
> The hardware and drivers should not be enforcing specific optics.  If
> a user buys a crap optic, then that is their problem.  Just like if
> they plug a crappy Cat3 RJ45 cable between the 1000Base-T NIC and the
> switch.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html