> Removable storage is quite slow unless you are willing to spend a lot of money.
An SSD good enough to copy tens of GB quickly is not cheap.
Traditionally (pre-2000?), one had to use a special "crossover cable" to do direct connections like this, but apparently modern Gigabit ethernet adapters are able to detect this situation automatically?
edit: as for length, it depends. you won't get a gigabit over 150m of crap cat3, but you will get a link, even if it's 10 half-duplex.
Configuring all this manually adds extra complexity when it seems that the goal is simply to connect up your cable and let 'er fly.
Occasionally we had someone who knew what they were doing and had their Windows 95 settings set up correctly, and then all we had to do was activate their room's Ethernet port and add their MAC address to the DHCP server's list of authorized MACs. But most often I or one of the other techs had to head down to the person's dorm room and set up their computer's network settings correctly before it would work. Once the 169.254 address was replaced by 192.168, my job was finally done. But there were times when that took some doing.
# ping all link-local devices on an interface:
ping ff02::1%eth0
And then do your socat/rsync/whatever to the only IP that responds.But with auto MDI-X, each device would notice "hey, I'm sending but not receiving anything," and would try flipping its Transmit and Receive functions around (transmitting on the RX pin and receiving on the TX pin). Since each device waited a random period before doing that, it was very unlikely (nigh-impossible) that they would both flip at the exact same moment. And if they did, the second interval would most likely not be identical either.
I'm simplifying a bit in the explanation above, but that's the broad strokes. And that's how my carefully-labeled crossover cables started gathering dust. (And then I realized "hey wait, I can just use these as normal cables now", and pulled them back out of storage and mixed them with my normal patch cables).
/looks longingly out the window, and catch my aging face in the reflection
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/westeri/thun...
The main difference between patch and "normal" is that the former is using stranded conductors and the latter solid conductors.
That makes the patch cable more flexible (physically)
lstodd•36m ago
bronlund•14m ago
Not Warcraft though - some ancient DOS game.
ButlerianJihad•14m ago
For every standalone building that has a ground, that building also has an electrical potential. This potential is not necessarily the same between two neighboring buildings. When you stretch a copper line between them, you are tempting fate, electrically, not to mention the dangers of lightning strikes and the elements attacking that connection.
It is generally recognized that fiber optics are not only very efficient and durable, but also impervious to electrical troubles of the type that may plague inter-building connections. Simply grab switches or routers that support at least one fiber-optic connection, and link up!
lstodd•7m ago
Besides you worry too much. Entire cities were wired with cat5 hanged off steel cable between 9 to 15 story buildings in early 2000s, before fiber. Nothing burned down.
EvanAnderson•5m ago
Because of this they were an early adopter of fiber-based networking. I remember being wowed by ATM over fiber running between closets at a blazing 155Mbps (with tons of 10BASE-T clients connected to FORE chassis switches).