<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Terabit Ethernet on the way</title>
	<atom:link href="http://insidehpc.com/2009/04/03/terabit-ethernet-on-the-way/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://insidehpc.com/2009/04/03/terabit-ethernet-on-the-way/</link>
	<description>HPC News Without the Noise for Supercomputing Professionals &#124; insideHPC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 10:46:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: zipdisk2003</title>
		<link>http://insidehpc.com/2009/04/03/terabit-ethernet-on-the-way/#comment-218301</link>
		<dc:creator>zipdisk2003</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 01:42:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insidehpc.com/?p=4242#comment-218301</guid>
		<description>Look at this post, http://www.terabit-ethernet.com/terabit-or-400g-ethernet/ people are talking about 400G before terabit ethernet. I think from hardware point of view, 400G could be more practical and realistic</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Look at this post, <a href="http://www.terabit-ethernet.com/terabit-or-400g-ethernet/" rel="nofollow">http://www.terabit-ethernet.com/terabit-or-400g-ethernet/</a> people are talking about 400G before terabit ethernet. I think from hardware point of view, 400G could be more practical and realistic</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
