31–40 of 81 posts
Am I mistaken or has Intel pretty much shelved the Tofino switching hardware that supports P4 in the first place? I seem to recall Oxide having to switch suppliers over this?
Yes, Intel canceled Tofino two years ago. I'm not complaining but it's weird that they're open sourcing the SDK now. Maybe it's to support Mount Evans.
As far as I can tell, Software Defined Networking (which this is about: "P4 is a domain-specific language for network devices") by now is pretty much a decade-old promise that never materialized. I'd still love to be wrong though! So, let's take the next paragraph: "Before P4, vendors had total control over the functionality supported in the network (...) controlled the rollout of new features (e.g., VXLAN), and roll…
Am I mistaken or has Intel pretty much shelved the Tofino switching hardware that supports P4 in the first place? I seem to recall Oxide having to switch suppliers over this?
I’m impressed by the political acumen it takes to get a Corp to release code as OSS. My career has seen at least two chunks of work that would have made great OSS (ie potentially useful outside of the single company) but Incoukd not get past the final hurdle And they would have been nice CV boosters as well (my real motivation!)
It helps that Intel has been contributing to OSS since forever, they have good internal processes established and some orgs develop/contribute to OSS pretty much exclusively.
They went from "we have tons of 3rd party IP in these!" to, "you don't need to download anything, it's in kernel mainline now" in a generation and they're off to the races after that.
Maybe their Ethernet drivers were open before that, I don't remember but, video drivers made them pass a threshold in maturity IMHO.
Am I mistaken or has Intel pretty much shelved the Tofino switching hardware that supports P4 in the first place? I seem to recall Oxide having to switch suppliers over this?
I also was told tofino was looking EOL. Like NUC, dropped from some C suites KPI set and longterm roadmap. I'd love to be wrong, this is just what people said.
Am I mistaken or has Intel pretty much shelved the Tofino switching hardware that supports P4 in the first place? I seem to recall Oxide having to switch suppliers over this?
I also was told tofino was looking EOL. Like NUC, dropped from some C suites KPI set and longterm roadmap. I'd love to be wrong, this is just what people said.
As far as I can tell, Software Defined Networking (which this is about: "P4 is a domain-specific language for network devices") by now is pretty much a decade-old promise that never materialized. I'd still love to be wrong though! So, let's take the next paragraph: "Before P4, vendors had total control over the functionality supported in the network (...) controlled the rollout of new features (e.g., VXLAN), and roll…
I would be curious as well. Every time we try something "software defined" the drawbacks are major, cost goes up, stability goes down and most importantly, bandwidth goes down by a factor 10. The only software defined networking gear we use is OpenBSD, to do some complex routing, but we cannot go above 5GB/s.