Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!chris
From: chris@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU (Chris Johnston)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Ethernet - Hyperchannel Gateway
Message-ID: <784@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU>
Date: Tue, 27-Oct-87 16:27:24 EST
Article-I.D.: gargoyle.784
Posted: Tue Oct 27 16:27:24 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Oct-87 04:23:59 EST
References: <8710191505.AA06315@morgul.PSC.EDU>
Reply-To: chris@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Chris Johnston)
Organization: U of Chicago - Computer Science
Lines: 31

I had a meeting last week with Hyperchannel sales people including
Dan Friegard(sp?) who is their IP product manager.

They have come out with some high performace products for connecting
ethernets.

The Ethernet Bridges route ethernet over 10 and 50 Mb/s hyperchannel
links.  (EN601 & EN603)  They claim that 10 Mb/s hyperchannel gets
better throughput than ethernet because they use collision avoidance
instead of collision detection.

Aside: Hyperchannel can can run at 10 & 50 Mb/s and can be
interconnected using T1, T2, T3, coax, fiber optic and satellite
links.  Four 50 Mb/s hyperchannels can be run in parallel for 200Mb/s
throughput.  Cray to Cray tops out at 20Mb/s.

The IP router (EN641) speaks EGP, RIP, and HELLO (gated).  And
handles IP, ICMP, and ARP.  It can have from 4-16 ethernets and 1-4
hyperchannels.  Peak performance is 2k packets/s per ethernet and 10k
packets/s through the router backplane.

All this information is from suits (salesman), reality may diverge...

Anyone have any real life, hands on opinions of these things?

cj
-- 
* -- Chris Johnston --        * UChicago Computer Science Dept
* chris@gargoyle.uchicago.edu * 1100 East 58th Street
* ...ihnp4!gargoyle!chris     * Chicago, IL  60637
* johnston@uchicago.BITNET    * 312-702-8440