RE: Phew looks like we were lucky
I think the point is not to 'fill the pipes' but to explore the options that become available when bandwidth is not a restriction. Necessarily there is another condition: the bandwidth has to be essentially free. Empty pipes capably of handing bursty/intermittent/occasional traffic at very high transfer rates will allow for completely different long distance apps than we currently use. Think what Mr Gates has done to use up the abundant/free cpu cycles and RAM. Not always good/useful/desirable, but different from what we thought heavy use of computing was 30 years ago. Time was when a typewriter took no cpu cycles at all. Frank March Specialist Advisor, IT Policy Group Ministry of Economic Development, PO Box 1473, Wellington, NZ Ph: (+64 4) 474 2908; Fax: (+64 4) 471 2658
-----Original Message----- From: Joe Abley [SMTP:jabley(a)automagic.org] Sent: Monday, 25 February 2002 17:10 To: Stephen Donnelly Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: Phew looks like we were lucky
On Sunday, February 24, 2002, at 10:37 , Stephen Donnelly wrote:
If your question Joe is 'what is the justification for internet2?', then I'd say there seems to be at least two commonly cited ones.
One is the use in current large applications such as 'grid' computing, a la DTF. Connecting super computer centres may consume a lot of bandwidth. Climate models, particle physics results etc.
How much bandwidth is "a lot of bandwidth"? I see commercial providers with multiple parallel STM-64s plumbed directly into routers either sides of the Atlantic and the Pacific, who are struggling to attract customers to even remotely fill the pipes. The situation in the metro and long-haul intracontinental networks is even more fibre-rich. I don't see a need to build another internet here -- I see a need to start using the existing one :)
The other one is that the internet2 is supposed to spurr new application development, showing what *can* be done with huge amounts of bandwidth when it's available at low cost. One of the more PR friendly applications would probably be the 'virtual teleconferencing' systems, where 3d models are transmitted along with the video, allowing participants to be rendered in 3d at each end. (Enables you to make direct eye contact, surprisingly important.)
This is the same answer as the one above, really -- "in order to obtain more bandwidth".
Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the Ministry of Economic Development. This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivery to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error and that any use is strictly prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your computer. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 15:23, Frank March wrote:
Think what Mr Gates has done to use up the abundant/free cpu cycles and RAM. Not always good/useful/desirable, but different from what we thought heavy use of computing was 30 years ago. Time was when a typewriter took no cpu cycles at all.
True in one sense, but I would not like to see us waste huge ammounts of bandwidth in the same proportions as Windows eats system resources. JSR is right though. Using bandwidth is not the issue, it's the fact that the person you are buying it off wants to charge an arm and a leg for it. I was able to fill my DSL pipe to the brim 24x7 when it was unrestricted, but then my provider put a 3G a month limit on it. I don't think we need Internet2 because I don't think that bandwidth providers will be able to swallow the charging model for our definition of 'High Bandwidth'. If you don't believe me then go and ask an NZ or AUS carrier what the price of an STM-64 is (yes it's a trick question on so many levels). Dean - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On 25 Feb 2002, Dean Pemberton wrote:
If you don't believe me then go and ask an NZ or AUS carrier what the price of an STM-64 is (yes it's a trick question on so many levels).
Just out of interest, I have now done this. :) I await the response with considerable anticipation. JSR -- John S Russell | Smile Chief Engineer - R&D | Nod Attica/Callplus NZ | Build it. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, J S Russell wrote:
Just out of interest, I have now done this. :) I await the response with considerable anticipation.
And unanswerable constipation, no doubt. However, JSR is entirely right: pricing is the problem, not the usage. I wrote a small piece about my problems with getting a reliable ADSL service in that illustrious and erudite publication, PC World New Zealand. I received a good amount of feedback from readers, but what surprised me was the people who wrote in, asking if I knew who could supply them 1-2Mbps connections at rates that didn't require them to sell their children to organ harvesters. Imagine if I had been able to earn commission of those sales leads! [1] Make no mistake: the demand is there, but not the willingness of providers to meet the market. [1] Damn this journalistic integrity thing. Arrgh! Arrgh! Arrgh! -- Juha Take off every sig! - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 16:00, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Make no mistake: the demand is there, but not the willingness of providers to meet the market.
Thats not always the case. It occurs to me now that my eariler post might have sounded like I wanted all for nothing. Thats not where I'm at. I'm just making the point that people are not using HUGE ammounts of bandwidth because it costs so much for them to do so. And it does that because for the most part it costs the carriers so much to provide it to them. So there you have it. I don't expect it to be for free. I'm just saying that the demand is certainly there, just that the pricepoint is lagging behind a bit. Dean - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On 25 Feb 2002, Dean Pemberton wrote:
And it does that because for the most part it costs the carriers so much to provide it to them.
That's because those unscrupulous router vendors charge so much for their equipment... - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
That's because those unscrupulous router vendors charge so much for their equipment...
I find myself in violent agreement with Micheal Newbery.. POA.... :-) /R Andy Linton wrote:
On 25 Feb 2002, Dean Pemberton wrote:
-- \_ Roger De Salis rdesalis(a)cisco.com
At 3:30 PM +1100 25/2/02, Dean Pemberton wrote:
If you don't believe me then go and ask an NZ or AUS carrier what the price of an STM-64 is (yes it's a trick question on so many levels).
Well, while the answer is right now: POA, I'd like to think it could be price book quite soon. Oh, you want *INTERNATIONAL* capacity? That's outside New Zealand, right? Ah, we might have to charge you a little more. We have the fibre, in NZ. We have the architecture. We have the boxes. We don't have the STM-64 interfaces, but we COULD have---they are just a mite pricey at the moment. They will get cheaper fairly soon. There are some cool things that can be done with multiple Gb within NZ, but to reach outside at that rate costs huge dollars. Which is why *we* don't run flat-rate cable Dean, you CHSD you :-) BTW, is Southern Cross currently specced at 10Gb? Are the optics up to it? -- Michael Newbery Technical Specialist TelstraClear Limited Tel: +64-4-939 5102 Mobile: +64-29-939 5102 Fax: +64-4-922 8401 - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
At 05:23 p.m. 25/02/2002 +1300, Frank March wrote:
I think the point is not to 'fill the pipes' but to explore the options that become available when bandwidth is not a restriction. Necessarily there is another condition: the bandwidth has to be essentially free. Empty pipes capably of handing bursty/intermittent/occasional traffic at very high transfer rates will allow for completely different long distance apps than we currently use.
In an earlier part of life, I worked on a network where the corona effect of every nut and bolt was a worry. It was a fast network with intermittent traffic (we had controllers watching TV to kick in gas turbines when the ads came on). Instability blacked out entire nations, routing was tricky and switching had to be checked 3 times before execution, cos "big things" going bang make an aweful mess. Besides they guys doing the switching could get killed (and did). Hair raising is a polite way of describing this work. Now we realised that not everyone wants this sort of fast pipe in their home. After all the 440KV towers filled most back yards with one foot, and how many homes REALLY do need 440KV with 2000 amps behind it ? yes thats close to a gigawatt of power. Thinking of IP, our pipes are getting faster. Gig NICs now cost the same as 56k modems and 10gig is here, with talk of 40/100 gig starting soon. But do you need it to your home ? Even with teenagers ? A very decent mpeg4 stream is going to take 700kbps, phones take 7 to 11kbps, so even with teenagers in teh average house with multiple phones each and watching several "channels" simultaneously, you can fit it in a 100mbps line. ie we have the technology already, just as we have 230V to homes and are satisfied. People who run 3 phase arc welders, and get JSRs big videos of course, get different pipes, but pay for it. So what about INET2 ? Well with lots of CPU cycles now available, fast pipes (say 100mbps to the home) and good codecs like mp4, we have what is needed. What we don't have is people playing with it. Why aren't we seeing medical tests with video ? or the "other applications" that INET2 is supposed to deliver ? I will wait for answers, but for now appologise for spraying that nasty 2.5mbps multicast stream out this afternoon..........I think I has it sussed now, altho the bloody box is spraying traffic all over my desk....... (this part gets us back on topic) rich richard.naylor(a)citylink.co.nz - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
participants (8)
-
Andy Linton -
Dean Pemberton -
Frank March -
J S Russell -
Juha Saarinen -
Michael Newbery -
Richard Naylor -
Roger De Salis