Relatedly, why can't I get a simple USB-C hub? I have four USB-C ports on my laptop and I need six. Back in the USB-A days, I'd just get a $30 hub and four new full speed ports at the cost of one on the laptop.
But now if I want three more full speed ports, I have to get a four port dock/hub that costs $179 and has to get plugged into the wall.
Am I not looking correctly or is there some technical limitation I'm not aware of or ...?
Edit: It seems like the consensus is basically "people wouldn't read the specs", which is a fair criticism. USB-C supports so many different types of devices that it would be impossible to make one that supports them all, and if you support a subset people would get mad that their device isn't in that subset.
One interesting takeaway for me was that there are actually some quite cheap hubs available from AliExpress and the "branded" ones are essentially the same with a logo printed on (and hopefully some additional QA).
Tons of answers here. I think, if you want complex usb-pd offerings, you need to accept a pretty high $$$ price for all those power regulation subsystems you are demanding. I would be surprised to hear that indeed all the current offerings require wall power, that none can operate off laptop/uplink- I think you are wrong. But perhaps.
Overall I think the main current barrier to entry has been usb-c alt modes. If someone plugs a hdmi adapter into one of the hubs ports, ehat happens then? USB3+C's crazy lane splitting has been pretty suboptimal for figuring out what the role of a hub really is in the world today.
USB4 at least fixes that, makes usb a packet switched transport that tunnels other protocols. Now if someome plugs a displayport adapter into a hub, it's just going to use bandwidth. The whole tree under the usb-root doesnt have to totslly rebuild itself to make available a lane for some other purpose. The flexibility of usb-c, with it's two channels, is a complexity we've only finally specified a proper means to make use of. It's getting better. Looking forward to some other companies starting to offer hub chips, seeing this young new scene begin to evolve.
Isn't the problem that anyone making such a device would have to deal with an endless stream of returns from customers who assumed they could just plug anything with the right form factor in only to discover that no, the bargain hub won't handle Thunderbolt, or 100W PD, or...
> Relatedly, why can't I get a simple USB-C hub? I have four USB-C ports on my laptop and I need six. Back in the USB-A days, I'd just get a $30 hub and four new full speed ports at the cost of one on the laptop.
The problem is that, I believe, a USB-C port is effectively required to provide a minimum of 5V at 3A on every port. I believe that USB 3 only requires 5V at 0.9A and USB 2.0 only requires 500mA (you nominally have to negotiate up to 500mA from 100mA--but nobody ever does that they just suck down 500mA without paying attention).
At that point, you can see how much more power USB-C is shoveling around. A 4-port hub is shoveling 60W minimum for USB-C, roughly 20W maximum for USB 3 and roughly 10W maximum for USB 2.
And, to be fair, life wasn't magically better in the USB 2 hub days. I have had loads of USB 2.0 hubs that do screwball things once they get a little overdrawn on their power. I eventually discovered that a good way to predict reliability of my USB 2 hubs was to look at the amperage of the wall wart that they shipped with it (the bigger the better).
And USB 3 isn't automatically better. I literally just had to replace a whole bunch of old, very nice, very stable, aluminum wedge USB 3 hubs because Microsoft updated something and simply plugging them in would blue screen the computer. Once I bought all new plastic chintztastic USB 3 hubs, Windoze is now happy. Microsoft can go die in a fire.
The standard is bonkers, and encapsulates other complex standards for kicks. Implementation requires a bunch of different chips and using the correct, unlabeled wire that is identical. My company is the proud owners of about 50,000 USB-C and USB—C/Thunderbolt docks.
They are both amazing and awful. One vendors thunderbolt dock is better than the plain USB-C, another is the opposite. Minor, undocumented differences in firmware or chip revisions may have a major impact on quality. One OEM’s driver bricked laptops.
When stuff works, it’s amazing to the point that it seems impossible. Some higher end workstations are pushing 5x more IO than a (admittedly aging) midrange SAN that’s on the floor can.
The problem is the plethora of features USB-C supports, and the bandwidth required to pass them all downstream. In other words, you need to passthru PCIe to the hub, and break out to USB-C and other ports from there,
Which is simply expensive.
On the other hand, Kingston's Nucleum is a nice hub. It provides two additional USB-C ports with PD support in one of them, provides two USB 3.0 USB-A ports, a proper card reader and an HDMI port.
I take photos and my camera produces 50MB images, and carrying them over a nice card reader which can use the full bandwidth of the card is nice, and Nucleum delivers.
I looked into how USB 2 unpowered hubs work and it sounds like "not very well."
For example, Anker sells a USB 3 hub and it's up to the user to make sure that whatever is plugged into it doesn't exceed 900 milliamps.
I'm thinking that a good way to go would be to get a hub that connects to a USB-C port and lets you plug in USB 2/3 devices? That way there's plenty of power for them without needing a power adapter. Plus USB 2 devices are cheaper.
I use a USB-C to USB-A converter, plug in an old USB-A hub, and plug USB-A to USB-C converters into each port.
Works great. You'll be stuck with USB 2.0 speeds, but it connects to, passes data to, and charges every single dumb device I have with no problems. Mice, keyboard, USB-C headphones, my phone, other laptops that charge over USB-C... and that's all I ever really wanted.
Relatedly, why can't I get a simple USB-C hub? I have four USB-C ports on my laptop and I need six. Back in the USB-A days, I'd just get a $30 hub and four new full speed ports at the cost of one on the laptop.
But now if I want three more full speed ports, I have to get a four port dock/hub that costs $179 and has to get plugged into the wall.
I'd be happy paying the $179, as long as I was sure the stupid thing did everything the port on my laptop does. And didn't require external power.
Right now, we're paying the $179, unsure if it actually does what we think (because the specs are so insane), and it's less usable. USB-C, in practice, is a giant step backwards. In theory, it's amazing, and when it works, it really is amazing, but holy crap, what a bowl of spaghetti.
From my experience it never was simple in USB-A days either. The cheap hubs or the one mounted on the desk just didn't provide enough voltage. Sure, it might work to run your mouse (if it's not a fancy one with LEDs), but good luck connecting an external HDD to one.
The limitation is that by wanting a USB-C hub, you've painted a dollar sign on your head. USB-A hubs are cheap and plentiful, and for many applications work fine with C devices with an A->C cable. If that's not sufficient, you must be a big spender.
> I have four USB-C ports on my laptop and I need six.
I have four USB ports on my laptop and I need three. Unfortunately two are C and all my cables are A.
I really wouldn't mind if USB-C just went away. I've got a single device with a C plug (which came with an A to C charging cable, of course) and some other brand new charging cables won't charge it if I don't hold the cable pushed in manually. Not sure if the cables are bad or the hole. I also find it harder to plug in than micro (maybe because there's no narrow point on the plug which you can put in the middle of the hole and then move it to the edge to automatically align it perfectly) and hate the metal on metal sound/feeling this gives. The plug seems to be badly designed compared to the other USB ports (never had this issue, from A to B to mini to micro to micro B) and very often has incompatibilities where you're just guessing whether a display is going to work at all.
And then there's the ports problem. I've got a number of old cheap USB hubs laying around, like every techie I guess, but C hubs? Well... So this can now all go in the trash. We should stop this madness and come up with a better plug rather than a worse one, if we need to change all hardware anyway we might as well do it right the first time.
I have a Platinet 4 port USB 3.x hub/docker (USB-C uplink) that doesn't need a external power, however I didn't benchmark the speed, but I don't have the disconnection problems that I had with unpowered 2.0 Hubs.
USB 1 and 2 were relatively simple protocols, and had very low energy profile (I think max power on the original USB 2.0 spec is 2.5W (5V, 0.5A) [0]. Same with bandwidth.
Back in USB 2.0 days, a single port could consume at most 480 Mbps in bandwidth, so let's say that your typical USB 2.0 hub consumed at most 2Gbps. That's very easy to accomplish in terms of I/O [1] (1 PCIe Gen 1.0 x1 port).
Now imagine 4 USB 3.2 or eventually 4.0 full speed ports: that is 20 Gbps per port, and Thunderbolt 3 has 40 Gbps per port. That means a 4-port HUB would need to have I/O capabilities of 80 or 160 Gbps. That is even beyond PCI express 4.0 w/ 4 lanes (8GB/s). A single Thunderbolt 3 port can consume theoretically half as much as the best and fastest NVMe SSDs (around 7 GB/s).
Basically, what I am trying to say is that it is getting harder and harder to achieve with USB 3.2 (and eventually 4.0) what was easy to do with USB 2.0. Our computers are just not getting fast enough to support all these I/O speeds. That's why most PCIe extension cards only offer a single USB-C port. A standard PCIe Gen 4.0 1x port cannot even support that at top speed!.
Take a look at this card [2]: a single USB port doesn't even support 20Gbps speeds, and half the ports share the same 10Gbps bandwidth. And this card requires a PCIe 3.0 x4 port.
And this is just bandwith. In terms of power, it is pretty much the same issue, Power Delivery can consume 100W at most. That's more power than the normal draw of a typical "ultrabook" laptop (around 60-65W). Now imagine 4 of these, 400W. That's a standard desktop PC PSU requirement.
tl;dr it is just not possible to support this much I/O speed and power draw with cheap consumer technology. That's why good USB 3.2 and Thunderbolt 3 hubs cost much, much more than USB 2.0 ever did. Also why they are much more complicated devices.
Related: When designing small electronics devices, my go to for plug-in power and simple data transmission (including serial-over-USB) is USB-C. It's small, reversible, and common due to phone chargers... and you can still wire it up and use it easily by just using the D+/- lines, power, and ground. (With appropriate CC resistors etc)
And the best part is that you don't even need a connector, you can just build it right into your PCB! USB-A also lets you do a PCB-only connector, but if you're doing anything that requires a cable instead of just plugging directly into a port, it's a lot more annoying to require a USB-A extension cable than any USB-C cable.
I can appreciate the presence of USB 2.0 as I have experienced issues with RF/noise on USB 3.
Wireless headphones… wireless mice… so yeah all 2.4ghz transceivers basically… lossy garbage connections have me tracing down old USB 2.0 ports on my PCs still today.
Leakage tests really should be a strongly enforced part certification. I still find myself taking apart products to add foil tape to them. Go nerdy me I guess?
Almost none of them are long enough to comfortably put a laptop on a stand and have the hub on the desk. If they would at least make the cables a bit longer it wouldn't be such a pain.
This explains soooo much, I had the Dell TB16, and sometimes, under certain conditions the mouse would cause the ethernet connection to reset, or vis versa.
I have a Caldigit USB-C pro dock with a macbook pro m1 plugged into it, and I have been having random and inconsistent (sometimes once or twice a day, other times nothing for a couple of weeks) sudden devices disconnection. What's weird is that suddenly my keyboard, audio out and ethernet stops working, but my 4k monitor plugged in Display Port keeps working without a hitch.
I'm pretty sure it's an issue with the USB controller, and the article convinced me more, but I still have zero clue on how to begin troubleshooting an issue like that.
It's also worth noting that DP and USB 3 lanes are shared. You can't use USB 3 when using a video mode that utilizes all 4 lanes (which is also why plenty of these hubs are limited to 4k30Hz on older DP revisions when they don't partition the lanes dynamically, as that's the most you can get out of 2 lanes).
I like the TB4 page. But I wish there were some deep level reviews.
I've tried every brand name TB3 dock. At least at the time, there were no simple "power expander" type docks, just the kind with a variety of ports. They are all buggy af. Although people do rave about the reliability of CalDigit, it's also buggy IME. I think people plug and unplug. If you leave any of these plugged in at all times, they all crash in some way.
Now with TB4, I have an Anker simple 1-up 3-down compact dock. It works great in my testing and I'm happy to use dongles as the dock isn't portable anyway. But I had to put it in the drawer for the future, since it only works in TB3 mode with Bug Sir and above, and I'm holding out with Catalina as long as possible.
I think people plug and unplug. If you leave any of these plugged in at all times, they all crash in some way.
Do you mean keep plugged in the laptop or keep the dock plugged into power all the time?
I have three StarTech Thunderbolt 3 docks and so far no issues. Except that the first two that I bought have a Realtek NIC (which has subpar performance on macOS). The third has an Intel I210 and I am completely happy with the dock.
What I also am curious though is why PCIe-based USB-C/Thunderbolt controller cards have so little (usually just one, some have two) numbers of ports? In the worst case (e.g. if it's extremely hard/expensive to produce a controller chip to support multiple independent ports) I would at least augment such cards with on-board hubs to turn one port into more so a user wouldn't need to attach an external hub.
In fact I have never seen a computer (neither laptop nor desktop) with more than 2 USB-C ports. This makes me feel like USB-C just has failed to become anything much more than a Micro-USB successor. Everything (incl. keyboards, mice and printers) going USB-C is probably never going to happen, is it?
The post says "Some folks would assume this is simply a cost saving measure..." and then goes on to explain in what way it actually is a cost saving measure.
May I introduce you to NoScript + uBlock Origin? I had to deactivate them to see what you're talking about. With them active no banner and the article was 100% accessible
[+] [-] jedberg|3 years ago|reply
But now if I want three more full speed ports, I have to get a four port dock/hub that costs $179 and has to get plugged into the wall.
Am I not looking correctly or is there some technical limitation I'm not aware of or ...?
Edit: It seems like the consensus is basically "people wouldn't read the specs", which is a fair criticism. USB-C supports so many different types of devices that it would be impossible to make one that supports them all, and if you support a subset people would get mad that their device isn't in that subset.
[+] [-] ascar|3 years ago|reply
USB-C hubs and my slow descent into madness
https://overengineer.dev/blog/2021/04/25/usb-c-hub-madness.h...
It was recently discussed on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30911598
One interesting takeaway for me was that there are actually some quite cheap hubs available from AliExpress and the "branded" ones are essentially the same with a logo printed on (and hopefully some additional QA).
[+] [-] rektide|3 years ago|reply
Overall I think the main current barrier to entry has been usb-c alt modes. If someone plugs a hdmi adapter into one of the hubs ports, ehat happens then? USB3+C's crazy lane splitting has been pretty suboptimal for figuring out what the role of a hub really is in the world today.
USB4 at least fixes that, makes usb a packet switched transport that tunnels other protocols. Now if someome plugs a displayport adapter into a hub, it's just going to use bandwidth. The whole tree under the usb-root doesnt have to totslly rebuild itself to make available a lane for some other purpose. The flexibility of usb-c, with it's two channels, is a complexity we've only finally specified a proper means to make use of. It's getting better. Looking forward to some other companies starting to offer hub chips, seeing this young new scene begin to evolve.
[+] [-] blacksmith_tb|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bsder|3 years ago|reply
The problem is that, I believe, a USB-C port is effectively required to provide a minimum of 5V at 3A on every port. I believe that USB 3 only requires 5V at 0.9A and USB 2.0 only requires 500mA (you nominally have to negotiate up to 500mA from 100mA--but nobody ever does that they just suck down 500mA without paying attention).
At that point, you can see how much more power USB-C is shoveling around. A 4-port hub is shoveling 60W minimum for USB-C, roughly 20W maximum for USB 3 and roughly 10W maximum for USB 2.
And, to be fair, life wasn't magically better in the USB 2 hub days. I have had loads of USB 2.0 hubs that do screwball things once they get a little overdrawn on their power. I eventually discovered that a good way to predict reliability of my USB 2 hubs was to look at the amperage of the wall wart that they shipped with it (the bigger the better).
And USB 3 isn't automatically better. I literally just had to replace a whole bunch of old, very nice, very stable, aluminum wedge USB 3 hubs because Microsoft updated something and simply plugging them in would blue screen the computer. Once I bought all new plastic chintztastic USB 3 hubs, Windoze is now happy. Microsoft can go die in a fire.
[+] [-] Spooky23|3 years ago|reply
The standard is bonkers, and encapsulates other complex standards for kicks. Implementation requires a bunch of different chips and using the correct, unlabeled wire that is identical. My company is the proud owners of about 50,000 USB-C and USB—C/Thunderbolt docks.
They are both amazing and awful. One vendors thunderbolt dock is better than the plain USB-C, another is the opposite. Minor, undocumented differences in firmware or chip revisions may have a major impact on quality. One OEM’s driver bricked laptops.
When stuff works, it’s amazing to the point that it seems impossible. Some higher end workstations are pushing 5x more IO than a (admittedly aging) midrange SAN that’s on the floor can.
[+] [-] maxerickson|3 years ago|reply
Found it bouncing through https://www.amazon.com/USB-C-Gen-Hub-Adapter-7-Ports/dp/B09M...
Left hub out, googled "USB-C 4 port" to get there.
[+] [-] bayindirh|3 years ago|reply
Which is simply expensive.
On the other hand, Kingston's Nucleum is a nice hub. It provides two additional USB-C ports with PD support in one of them, provides two USB 3.0 USB-A ports, a proper card reader and an HDMI port.
I take photos and my camera produces 50MB images, and carrying them over a nice card reader which can use the full bandwidth of the card is nice, and Nucleum delivers.
[+] [-] skybrian|3 years ago|reply
For example, Anker sells a USB 3 hub and it's up to the user to make sure that whatever is plugged into it doesn't exceed 900 milliamps.
I'm thinking that a good way to go would be to get a hub that connects to a USB-C port and lets you plug in USB 2/3 devices? That way there's plenty of power for them without needing a power adapter. Plus USB 2 devices are cheaper.
[+] [-] jeffbee|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Groxx|3 years ago|reply
Works great. You'll be stuck with USB 2.0 speeds, but it connects to, passes data to, and charges every single dumb device I have with no problems. Mice, keyboard, USB-C headphones, my phone, other laptops that charge over USB-C... and that's all I ever really wanted.
Apple's 2-USB-C-port laptop was literal insanity.
[+] [-] nixpulvis|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alistairSH|3 years ago|reply
I'd be happy paying the $179, as long as I was sure the stupid thing did everything the port on my laptop does. And didn't require external power.
Right now, we're paying the $179, unsure if it actually does what we think (because the specs are so insane), and it's less usable. USB-C, in practice, is a giant step backwards. In theory, it's amazing, and when it works, it really is amazing, but holy crap, what a bowl of spaghetti.
[+] [-] skocznymroczny|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] toast0|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Aachen|3 years ago|reply
I have four USB ports on my laptop and I need three. Unfortunately two are C and all my cables are A.
I really wouldn't mind if USB-C just went away. I've got a single device with a C plug (which came with an A to C charging cable, of course) and some other brand new charging cables won't charge it if I don't hold the cable pushed in manually. Not sure if the cables are bad or the hole. I also find it harder to plug in than micro (maybe because there's no narrow point on the plug which you can put in the middle of the hole and then move it to the edge to automatically align it perfectly) and hate the metal on metal sound/feeling this gives. The plug seems to be badly designed compared to the other USB ports (never had this issue, from A to B to mini to micro to micro B) and very often has incompatibilities where you're just guessing whether a display is going to work at all.
And then there's the ports problem. I've got a number of old cheap USB hubs laying around, like every techie I guess, but C hubs? Well... So this can now all go in the trash. We should stop this madness and come up with a better plug rather than a worse one, if we need to change all hardware anyway we might as well do it right the first time.
[+] [-] oldsecondhand|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] gumby|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notRobot|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rawbot|3 years ago|reply
Back in USB 2.0 days, a single port could consume at most 480 Mbps in bandwidth, so let's say that your typical USB 2.0 hub consumed at most 2Gbps. That's very easy to accomplish in terms of I/O [1] (1 PCIe Gen 1.0 x1 port).
Now imagine 4 USB 3.2 or eventually 4.0 full speed ports: that is 20 Gbps per port, and Thunderbolt 3 has 40 Gbps per port. That means a 4-port HUB would need to have I/O capabilities of 80 or 160 Gbps. That is even beyond PCI express 4.0 w/ 4 lanes (8GB/s). A single Thunderbolt 3 port can consume theoretically half as much as the best and fastest NVMe SSDs (around 7 GB/s).
Basically, what I am trying to say is that it is getting harder and harder to achieve with USB 3.2 (and eventually 4.0) what was easy to do with USB 2.0. Our computers are just not getting fast enough to support all these I/O speeds. That's why most PCIe extension cards only offer a single USB-C port. A standard PCIe Gen 4.0 1x port cannot even support that at top speed!.
Take a look at this card [2]: a single USB port doesn't even support 20Gbps speeds, and half the ports share the same 10Gbps bandwidth. And this card requires a PCIe 3.0 x4 port.
And this is just bandwith. In terms of power, it is pretty much the same issue, Power Delivery can consume 100W at most. That's more power than the normal draw of a typical "ultrabook" laptop (around 60-65W). Now imagine 4 of these, 400W. That's a standard desktop PC PSU requirement.
tl;dr it is just not possible to support this much I/O speed and power draw with cheap consumer technology. That's why good USB 3.2 and Thunderbolt 3 hubs cost much, much more than USB 2.0 ever did. Also why they are much more complicated devices.
[0] https://www.tripplite.com/products/usb-charging [1] https://www.crucial.com/support/articles-faq-ssd/pcie-speeds... [2] https://www.newegg.com/inateck-ku8211-red-pci-express-to-usb...
[+] [-] the__alchemist|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmgao|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Vladimof|3 years ago|reply
Can you push for USB-O, the round USB connector? /s
[+] [-] asciimov|3 years ago|reply
Thanks to Apple keeping iPhones on lightning connectors the only things with USB-C I have in my house is a Nintendo Switch and a Soldering Iron.
[+] [-] amelius|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] boopmaster|3 years ago|reply
Wireless headphones… wireless mice… so yeah all 2.4ghz transceivers basically… lossy garbage connections have me tracing down old USB 2.0 ports on my PCs still today.
[+] [-] li2uR3ce|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] randomluck040|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davidgay|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xmprt|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AndyPa32|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] noneeeed|3 years ago|reply
Almost none of them are long enough to comfortably put a laptop on a stand and have the hub on the desk. If they would at least make the cables a bit longer it wouldn't be such a pain.
[+] [-] vxNsr|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nowahe|3 years ago|reply
I'm pretty sure it's an issue with the USB controller, and the article convinced me more, but I still have zero clue on how to begin troubleshooting an issue like that.
[+] [-] seba_dos1|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jiveturkey|3 years ago|reply
I've tried every brand name TB3 dock. At least at the time, there were no simple "power expander" type docks, just the kind with a variety of ports. They are all buggy af. Although people do rave about the reliability of CalDigit, it's also buggy IME. I think people plug and unplug. If you leave any of these plugged in at all times, they all crash in some way.
Now with TB4, I have an Anker simple 1-up 3-down compact dock. It works great in my testing and I'm happy to use dongles as the dock isn't portable anyway. But I had to put it in the drawer for the future, since it only works in TB3 mode with Bug Sir and above, and I'm holding out with Catalina as long as possible.
[+] [-] microtonal|3 years ago|reply
Do you mean keep plugged in the laptop or keep the dock plugged into power all the time?
I have three StarTech Thunderbolt 3 docks and so far no issues. Except that the first two that I bought have a Realtek NIC (which has subpar performance on macOS). The third has an Intel I210 and I am completely happy with the dock.
[+] [-] qwerty456127|3 years ago|reply
What I also am curious though is why PCIe-based USB-C/Thunderbolt controller cards have so little (usually just one, some have two) numbers of ports? In the worst case (e.g. if it's extremely hard/expensive to produce a controller chip to support multiple independent ports) I would at least augment such cards with on-board hubs to turn one port into more so a user wouldn't need to attach an external hub.
In fact I have never seen a computer (neither laptop nor desktop) with more than 2 USB-C ports. This makes me feel like USB-C just has failed to become anything much more than a Micro-USB successor. Everything (incl. keyboards, mice and printers) going USB-C is probably never going to happen, is it?
[+] [-] Nition|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Al-Khwarizmi|3 years ago|reply
Very interesting anyway to know how it works.
[+] [-] pnutjam|3 years ago|reply
ETA for new stock shows early June.
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] bacan|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] amq|3 years ago|reply
- HDMI
- 2x USB A
- MicroSD
[+] [-] ryukoposting|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unnouinceput|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]