Does bridging add delay?












9














If I use a bridge to perform traffic sniffing like man in the middle will the bridge add a delay? And what word should I use delay or latency?










share|improve this question







New contributor




nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • If you want zero delay, use a tap -- the signal is electrically (or optically) replicated, so you see exactly what was sent (errors and all) [note: they're expensive, despite the $5 worth of logic inside them]
    – Ricky Beam
    yesterday


















9














If I use a bridge to perform traffic sniffing like man in the middle will the bridge add a delay? And what word should I use delay or latency?










share|improve this question







New contributor




nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • If you want zero delay, use a tap -- the signal is electrically (or optically) replicated, so you see exactly what was sent (errors and all) [note: they're expensive, despite the $5 worth of logic inside them]
    – Ricky Beam
    yesterday
















9












9








9







If I use a bridge to perform traffic sniffing like man in the middle will the bridge add a delay? And what word should I use delay or latency?










share|improve this question







New contributor




nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











If I use a bridge to perform traffic sniffing like man in the middle will the bridge add a delay? And what word should I use delay or latency?







layer1 cabling bridge latency mitm






share|improve this question







New contributor




nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









nufunilizanufuniliza

554




554




New contributor




nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






nufuniliza is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • If you want zero delay, use a tap -- the signal is electrically (or optically) replicated, so you see exactly what was sent (errors and all) [note: they're expensive, despite the $5 worth of logic inside them]
    – Ricky Beam
    yesterday




















  • If you want zero delay, use a tap -- the signal is electrically (or optically) replicated, so you see exactly what was sent (errors and all) [note: they're expensive, despite the $5 worth of logic inside them]
    – Ricky Beam
    yesterday


















If you want zero delay, use a tap -- the signal is electrically (or optically) replicated, so you see exactly what was sent (errors and all) [note: they're expensive, despite the $5 worth of logic inside them]
– Ricky Beam
yesterday






If you want zero delay, use a tap -- the signal is electrically (or optically) replicated, so you see exactly what was sent (errors and all) [note: they're expensive, despite the $5 worth of logic inside them]
– Ricky Beam
yesterday












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















12














Hi and welcome to Network Engineering.



As for "delay" vs "latency":
The terms are not always used consistently. Some hints may be found here.



I think generally, the term latency is used when looking at end-to-end times for one direction, which essentially are composed of the sum of all propagation, serialization, buffering (and possibly processing) delays introduced by the various components along the path from source to destination (and back, if one wants to talk about round trip times (RTT) ). So you may say that a bridge adds some delay to the overall latency.



(next section edited after a helpful comment)
A bridge, when compared to a direct cable, will add at least once the serialization delay of the given network medium (of the bridge's egress side), after processing it, to send the frame's bits out again on the egress side. Of course, one amount of serialization delay is added per direction, and since the majority of use cases requires (at least some) data to flow in either direction, the bridge will eventually add serialization delay twice.



Also see this question and wiki.geant.org for its table about serialization delays).




Serialization Delays for various Media, from https://wiki.geant.org/display/public/EK/SerializationDelay




In your case, some additional buffering and processing delay will occur due to the "man in the middle thing". How much that will be is entirely up to the processing capacity of the given bridging software on the given platform, and the various features and modules the frame is being subjected to.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    Haven't had my coffee so may not be thinking straight, but does adding a bridge necessarily add two times the serialization delay? Obviously it will always add one serialization delay (unless there's some sort of cut-through going on), but the "sending" serialisation happens in parallel with the next receiver's deserialisation, (which was always going to happen anyway), so isn't it only effectively one extra delay in total? Sorry if that's not very clear...
    – psmears
    yesterday






  • 1




    @psmears The serialization delay when the bridge sends out the frame at the far end will occur in any case, agreed. As for the receiving side... Let's imagine a otherwise identical "direct" cable bypassing the bridge, where the same bit sequence is sent synchronously, but bypassing the bridge. In the cable, bits just propagate down the line, while the bridge is waiting for the last bit to start processing... Oh. you're right, Thanks! Time for an edit, then.
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • The serialization delay is at wirespeed, so it is not much of a delay. Most modern enterprise-grade switches will switch at wirespeed, so any delay is very, very small, probably caused by congestion and queuing on an oversubscribed interface.
    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday



















8














Yes, a bridge / switch adds some delay to a frame - in the order of 1 to 20 µs.



For switches you usually speak of latency - the delay between receiving a frame and forwarding it out another port. A switch requires some time to receive the destination address and make the forwarding decision. Store-and-forward switches (the common kind) need to receive the entire frame before starting to forward. High-speed cut-through switches can get below 1 µs. Edit: as @kasperd has correctly pointed out, cut-through is only possible with source and destination ports at the same speed or stepping down.






share|improve this answer



















  • 3




    Worth noting that cut-through only achieves optimal performance when incoming and outgoing links run at the same bitrate. And it might be that no vendor even bothered to implement cut-through for mixed bitrate scenarios.
    – kasperd
    yesterday






  • 2




    @Kasperd Cisco, for their Nexus 3000 series, claims "cut-through" for identical speeds and speed-stepdown scenarios (40G--> 1/10G), but not for speed-stepups (1/10G -> 40g) . cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus3000/sw/…
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • @kasperd & Marc'netztier'Luethi - Absolutely, thx. Cut-through with stepping up is impossible since you quickly run out of data (unless you now the frame length which you don't).
    – Zac67
    yesterday










  • @Zac67 The length is known on some frames but not on all frames. (And after reading how that works I am sort of regretting looking it up in the first place.)
    – kasperd
    yesterday











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "496"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});






nufuniliza is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55942%2fdoes-bridging-add-delay%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









12














Hi and welcome to Network Engineering.



As for "delay" vs "latency":
The terms are not always used consistently. Some hints may be found here.



I think generally, the term latency is used when looking at end-to-end times for one direction, which essentially are composed of the sum of all propagation, serialization, buffering (and possibly processing) delays introduced by the various components along the path from source to destination (and back, if one wants to talk about round trip times (RTT) ). So you may say that a bridge adds some delay to the overall latency.



(next section edited after a helpful comment)
A bridge, when compared to a direct cable, will add at least once the serialization delay of the given network medium (of the bridge's egress side), after processing it, to send the frame's bits out again on the egress side. Of course, one amount of serialization delay is added per direction, and since the majority of use cases requires (at least some) data to flow in either direction, the bridge will eventually add serialization delay twice.



Also see this question and wiki.geant.org for its table about serialization delays).




Serialization Delays for various Media, from https://wiki.geant.org/display/public/EK/SerializationDelay




In your case, some additional buffering and processing delay will occur due to the "man in the middle thing". How much that will be is entirely up to the processing capacity of the given bridging software on the given platform, and the various features and modules the frame is being subjected to.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    Haven't had my coffee so may not be thinking straight, but does adding a bridge necessarily add two times the serialization delay? Obviously it will always add one serialization delay (unless there's some sort of cut-through going on), but the "sending" serialisation happens in parallel with the next receiver's deserialisation, (which was always going to happen anyway), so isn't it only effectively one extra delay in total? Sorry if that's not very clear...
    – psmears
    yesterday






  • 1




    @psmears The serialization delay when the bridge sends out the frame at the far end will occur in any case, agreed. As for the receiving side... Let's imagine a otherwise identical "direct" cable bypassing the bridge, where the same bit sequence is sent synchronously, but bypassing the bridge. In the cable, bits just propagate down the line, while the bridge is waiting for the last bit to start processing... Oh. you're right, Thanks! Time for an edit, then.
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • The serialization delay is at wirespeed, so it is not much of a delay. Most modern enterprise-grade switches will switch at wirespeed, so any delay is very, very small, probably caused by congestion and queuing on an oversubscribed interface.
    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday
















12














Hi and welcome to Network Engineering.



As for "delay" vs "latency":
The terms are not always used consistently. Some hints may be found here.



I think generally, the term latency is used when looking at end-to-end times for one direction, which essentially are composed of the sum of all propagation, serialization, buffering (and possibly processing) delays introduced by the various components along the path from source to destination (and back, if one wants to talk about round trip times (RTT) ). So you may say that a bridge adds some delay to the overall latency.



(next section edited after a helpful comment)
A bridge, when compared to a direct cable, will add at least once the serialization delay of the given network medium (of the bridge's egress side), after processing it, to send the frame's bits out again on the egress side. Of course, one amount of serialization delay is added per direction, and since the majority of use cases requires (at least some) data to flow in either direction, the bridge will eventually add serialization delay twice.



Also see this question and wiki.geant.org for its table about serialization delays).




Serialization Delays for various Media, from https://wiki.geant.org/display/public/EK/SerializationDelay




In your case, some additional buffering and processing delay will occur due to the "man in the middle thing". How much that will be is entirely up to the processing capacity of the given bridging software on the given platform, and the various features and modules the frame is being subjected to.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    Haven't had my coffee so may not be thinking straight, but does adding a bridge necessarily add two times the serialization delay? Obviously it will always add one serialization delay (unless there's some sort of cut-through going on), but the "sending" serialisation happens in parallel with the next receiver's deserialisation, (which was always going to happen anyway), so isn't it only effectively one extra delay in total? Sorry if that's not very clear...
    – psmears
    yesterday






  • 1




    @psmears The serialization delay when the bridge sends out the frame at the far end will occur in any case, agreed. As for the receiving side... Let's imagine a otherwise identical "direct" cable bypassing the bridge, where the same bit sequence is sent synchronously, but bypassing the bridge. In the cable, bits just propagate down the line, while the bridge is waiting for the last bit to start processing... Oh. you're right, Thanks! Time for an edit, then.
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • The serialization delay is at wirespeed, so it is not much of a delay. Most modern enterprise-grade switches will switch at wirespeed, so any delay is very, very small, probably caused by congestion and queuing on an oversubscribed interface.
    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday














12












12








12






Hi and welcome to Network Engineering.



As for "delay" vs "latency":
The terms are not always used consistently. Some hints may be found here.



I think generally, the term latency is used when looking at end-to-end times for one direction, which essentially are composed of the sum of all propagation, serialization, buffering (and possibly processing) delays introduced by the various components along the path from source to destination (and back, if one wants to talk about round trip times (RTT) ). So you may say that a bridge adds some delay to the overall latency.



(next section edited after a helpful comment)
A bridge, when compared to a direct cable, will add at least once the serialization delay of the given network medium (of the bridge's egress side), after processing it, to send the frame's bits out again on the egress side. Of course, one amount of serialization delay is added per direction, and since the majority of use cases requires (at least some) data to flow in either direction, the bridge will eventually add serialization delay twice.



Also see this question and wiki.geant.org for its table about serialization delays).




Serialization Delays for various Media, from https://wiki.geant.org/display/public/EK/SerializationDelay




In your case, some additional buffering and processing delay will occur due to the "man in the middle thing". How much that will be is entirely up to the processing capacity of the given bridging software on the given platform, and the various features and modules the frame is being subjected to.






share|improve this answer














Hi and welcome to Network Engineering.



As for "delay" vs "latency":
The terms are not always used consistently. Some hints may be found here.



I think generally, the term latency is used when looking at end-to-end times for one direction, which essentially are composed of the sum of all propagation, serialization, buffering (and possibly processing) delays introduced by the various components along the path from source to destination (and back, if one wants to talk about round trip times (RTT) ). So you may say that a bridge adds some delay to the overall latency.



(next section edited after a helpful comment)
A bridge, when compared to a direct cable, will add at least once the serialization delay of the given network medium (of the bridge's egress side), after processing it, to send the frame's bits out again on the egress side. Of course, one amount of serialization delay is added per direction, and since the majority of use cases requires (at least some) data to flow in either direction, the bridge will eventually add serialization delay twice.



Also see this question and wiki.geant.org for its table about serialization delays).




Serialization Delays for various Media, from https://wiki.geant.org/display/public/EK/SerializationDelay




In your case, some additional buffering and processing delay will occur due to the "man in the middle thing". How much that will be is entirely up to the processing capacity of the given bridging software on the given platform, and the various features and modules the frame is being subjected to.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 20 hours ago









nufuniliza

554




554










answered 2 days ago









Marc 'netztier' LuethiMarc 'netztier' Luethi

3,363420




3,363420








  • 1




    Haven't had my coffee so may not be thinking straight, but does adding a bridge necessarily add two times the serialization delay? Obviously it will always add one serialization delay (unless there's some sort of cut-through going on), but the "sending" serialisation happens in parallel with the next receiver's deserialisation, (which was always going to happen anyway), so isn't it only effectively one extra delay in total? Sorry if that's not very clear...
    – psmears
    yesterday






  • 1




    @psmears The serialization delay when the bridge sends out the frame at the far end will occur in any case, agreed. As for the receiving side... Let's imagine a otherwise identical "direct" cable bypassing the bridge, where the same bit sequence is sent synchronously, but bypassing the bridge. In the cable, bits just propagate down the line, while the bridge is waiting for the last bit to start processing... Oh. you're right, Thanks! Time for an edit, then.
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • The serialization delay is at wirespeed, so it is not much of a delay. Most modern enterprise-grade switches will switch at wirespeed, so any delay is very, very small, probably caused by congestion and queuing on an oversubscribed interface.
    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday














  • 1




    Haven't had my coffee so may not be thinking straight, but does adding a bridge necessarily add two times the serialization delay? Obviously it will always add one serialization delay (unless there's some sort of cut-through going on), but the "sending" serialisation happens in parallel with the next receiver's deserialisation, (which was always going to happen anyway), so isn't it only effectively one extra delay in total? Sorry if that's not very clear...
    – psmears
    yesterday






  • 1




    @psmears The serialization delay when the bridge sends out the frame at the far end will occur in any case, agreed. As for the receiving side... Let's imagine a otherwise identical "direct" cable bypassing the bridge, where the same bit sequence is sent synchronously, but bypassing the bridge. In the cable, bits just propagate down the line, while the bridge is waiting for the last bit to start processing... Oh. you're right, Thanks! Time for an edit, then.
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • The serialization delay is at wirespeed, so it is not much of a delay. Most modern enterprise-grade switches will switch at wirespeed, so any delay is very, very small, probably caused by congestion and queuing on an oversubscribed interface.
    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday








1




1




Haven't had my coffee so may not be thinking straight, but does adding a bridge necessarily add two times the serialization delay? Obviously it will always add one serialization delay (unless there's some sort of cut-through going on), but the "sending" serialisation happens in parallel with the next receiver's deserialisation, (which was always going to happen anyway), so isn't it only effectively one extra delay in total? Sorry if that's not very clear...
– psmears
yesterday




Haven't had my coffee so may not be thinking straight, but does adding a bridge necessarily add two times the serialization delay? Obviously it will always add one serialization delay (unless there's some sort of cut-through going on), but the "sending" serialisation happens in parallel with the next receiver's deserialisation, (which was always going to happen anyway), so isn't it only effectively one extra delay in total? Sorry if that's not very clear...
– psmears
yesterday




1




1




@psmears The serialization delay when the bridge sends out the frame at the far end will occur in any case, agreed. As for the receiving side... Let's imagine a otherwise identical "direct" cable bypassing the bridge, where the same bit sequence is sent synchronously, but bypassing the bridge. In the cable, bits just propagate down the line, while the bridge is waiting for the last bit to start processing... Oh. you're right, Thanks! Time for an edit, then.
– Marc 'netztier' Luethi
yesterday




@psmears The serialization delay when the bridge sends out the frame at the far end will occur in any case, agreed. As for the receiving side... Let's imagine a otherwise identical "direct" cable bypassing the bridge, where the same bit sequence is sent synchronously, but bypassing the bridge. In the cable, bits just propagate down the line, while the bridge is waiting for the last bit to start processing... Oh. you're right, Thanks! Time for an edit, then.
– Marc 'netztier' Luethi
yesterday












The serialization delay is at wirespeed, so it is not much of a delay. Most modern enterprise-grade switches will switch at wirespeed, so any delay is very, very small, probably caused by congestion and queuing on an oversubscribed interface.
– Ron Maupin
yesterday




The serialization delay is at wirespeed, so it is not much of a delay. Most modern enterprise-grade switches will switch at wirespeed, so any delay is very, very small, probably caused by congestion and queuing on an oversubscribed interface.
– Ron Maupin
yesterday











8














Yes, a bridge / switch adds some delay to a frame - in the order of 1 to 20 µs.



For switches you usually speak of latency - the delay between receiving a frame and forwarding it out another port. A switch requires some time to receive the destination address and make the forwarding decision. Store-and-forward switches (the common kind) need to receive the entire frame before starting to forward. High-speed cut-through switches can get below 1 µs. Edit: as @kasperd has correctly pointed out, cut-through is only possible with source and destination ports at the same speed or stepping down.






share|improve this answer



















  • 3




    Worth noting that cut-through only achieves optimal performance when incoming and outgoing links run at the same bitrate. And it might be that no vendor even bothered to implement cut-through for mixed bitrate scenarios.
    – kasperd
    yesterday






  • 2




    @Kasperd Cisco, for their Nexus 3000 series, claims "cut-through" for identical speeds and speed-stepdown scenarios (40G--> 1/10G), but not for speed-stepups (1/10G -> 40g) . cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus3000/sw/…
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • @kasperd & Marc'netztier'Luethi - Absolutely, thx. Cut-through with stepping up is impossible since you quickly run out of data (unless you now the frame length which you don't).
    – Zac67
    yesterday










  • @Zac67 The length is known on some frames but not on all frames. (And after reading how that works I am sort of regretting looking it up in the first place.)
    – kasperd
    yesterday
















8














Yes, a bridge / switch adds some delay to a frame - in the order of 1 to 20 µs.



For switches you usually speak of latency - the delay between receiving a frame and forwarding it out another port. A switch requires some time to receive the destination address and make the forwarding decision. Store-and-forward switches (the common kind) need to receive the entire frame before starting to forward. High-speed cut-through switches can get below 1 µs. Edit: as @kasperd has correctly pointed out, cut-through is only possible with source and destination ports at the same speed or stepping down.






share|improve this answer



















  • 3




    Worth noting that cut-through only achieves optimal performance when incoming and outgoing links run at the same bitrate. And it might be that no vendor even bothered to implement cut-through for mixed bitrate scenarios.
    – kasperd
    yesterday






  • 2




    @Kasperd Cisco, for their Nexus 3000 series, claims "cut-through" for identical speeds and speed-stepdown scenarios (40G--> 1/10G), but not for speed-stepups (1/10G -> 40g) . cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus3000/sw/…
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • @kasperd & Marc'netztier'Luethi - Absolutely, thx. Cut-through with stepping up is impossible since you quickly run out of data (unless you now the frame length which you don't).
    – Zac67
    yesterday










  • @Zac67 The length is known on some frames but not on all frames. (And after reading how that works I am sort of regretting looking it up in the first place.)
    – kasperd
    yesterday














8












8








8






Yes, a bridge / switch adds some delay to a frame - in the order of 1 to 20 µs.



For switches you usually speak of latency - the delay between receiving a frame and forwarding it out another port. A switch requires some time to receive the destination address and make the forwarding decision. Store-and-forward switches (the common kind) need to receive the entire frame before starting to forward. High-speed cut-through switches can get below 1 µs. Edit: as @kasperd has correctly pointed out, cut-through is only possible with source and destination ports at the same speed or stepping down.






share|improve this answer














Yes, a bridge / switch adds some delay to a frame - in the order of 1 to 20 µs.



For switches you usually speak of latency - the delay between receiving a frame and forwarding it out another port. A switch requires some time to receive the destination address and make the forwarding decision. Store-and-forward switches (the common kind) need to receive the entire frame before starting to forward. High-speed cut-through switches can get below 1 µs. Edit: as @kasperd has correctly pointed out, cut-through is only possible with source and destination ports at the same speed or stepping down.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered 2 days ago









Zac67Zac67

26.6k21352




26.6k21352








  • 3




    Worth noting that cut-through only achieves optimal performance when incoming and outgoing links run at the same bitrate. And it might be that no vendor even bothered to implement cut-through for mixed bitrate scenarios.
    – kasperd
    yesterday






  • 2




    @Kasperd Cisco, for their Nexus 3000 series, claims "cut-through" for identical speeds and speed-stepdown scenarios (40G--> 1/10G), but not for speed-stepups (1/10G -> 40g) . cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus3000/sw/…
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • @kasperd & Marc'netztier'Luethi - Absolutely, thx. Cut-through with stepping up is impossible since you quickly run out of data (unless you now the frame length which you don't).
    – Zac67
    yesterday










  • @Zac67 The length is known on some frames but not on all frames. (And after reading how that works I am sort of regretting looking it up in the first place.)
    – kasperd
    yesterday














  • 3




    Worth noting that cut-through only achieves optimal performance when incoming and outgoing links run at the same bitrate. And it might be that no vendor even bothered to implement cut-through for mixed bitrate scenarios.
    – kasperd
    yesterday






  • 2




    @Kasperd Cisco, for their Nexus 3000 series, claims "cut-through" for identical speeds and speed-stepdown scenarios (40G--> 1/10G), but not for speed-stepups (1/10G -> 40g) . cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus3000/sw/…
    – Marc 'netztier' Luethi
    yesterday










  • @kasperd & Marc'netztier'Luethi - Absolutely, thx. Cut-through with stepping up is impossible since you quickly run out of data (unless you now the frame length which you don't).
    – Zac67
    yesterday










  • @Zac67 The length is known on some frames but not on all frames. (And after reading how that works I am sort of regretting looking it up in the first place.)
    – kasperd
    yesterday








3




3




Worth noting that cut-through only achieves optimal performance when incoming and outgoing links run at the same bitrate. And it might be that no vendor even bothered to implement cut-through for mixed bitrate scenarios.
– kasperd
yesterday




Worth noting that cut-through only achieves optimal performance when incoming and outgoing links run at the same bitrate. And it might be that no vendor even bothered to implement cut-through for mixed bitrate scenarios.
– kasperd
yesterday




2




2




@Kasperd Cisco, for their Nexus 3000 series, claims "cut-through" for identical speeds and speed-stepdown scenarios (40G--> 1/10G), but not for speed-stepups (1/10G -> 40g) . cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus3000/sw/…
– Marc 'netztier' Luethi
yesterday




@Kasperd Cisco, for their Nexus 3000 series, claims "cut-through" for identical speeds and speed-stepdown scenarios (40G--> 1/10G), but not for speed-stepups (1/10G -> 40g) . cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus3000/sw/…
– Marc 'netztier' Luethi
yesterday












@kasperd & Marc'netztier'Luethi - Absolutely, thx. Cut-through with stepping up is impossible since you quickly run out of data (unless you now the frame length which you don't).
– Zac67
yesterday




@kasperd & Marc'netztier'Luethi - Absolutely, thx. Cut-through with stepping up is impossible since you quickly run out of data (unless you now the frame length which you don't).
– Zac67
yesterday












@Zac67 The length is known on some frames but not on all frames. (And after reading how that works I am sort of regretting looking it up in the first place.)
– kasperd
yesterday




@Zac67 The length is known on some frames but not on all frames. (And after reading how that works I am sort of regretting looking it up in the first place.)
– kasperd
yesterday










nufuniliza is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















nufuniliza is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













nufuniliza is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












nufuniliza is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















Thanks for contributing an answer to Network Engineering Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55942%2fdoes-bridging-add-delay%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

1300-talet

1300-talet

Display a custom attribute below product name in the front-end Magento 1.9.3.8