Slashdot Mirror

As usual, someone is confusing Internet2 with Abilene Which is Internet2's high speed network. Abilene is just a part of what Internet2 does. If you ask me (and I know you didn't), Internet2's middleware stuff is much more interesting and ground breaking than a silly high speed network. Check out Shibboleth if you want to know where the Liberty Alliance got pretty much all their ideas :)

Finkployd

As usual, someone is confusing Internet2 with Abilene Which is Internet2's high speed network. Abilene is just a part of what Internet2 does. If you ask me (and I know you didn't), Internet2's middleware stuff is much more interesting and ground breaking than a silly high speed network. Check out Shibboleth if you want to know where the Liberty Alliance got pretty much all their ideas :)

Finkployd

You'll never get Internet2 connectivity, unless you are a research institution (or related to one in some capacity). Read about the purpose of Internet2 here.

Basically Internet2 is a big playground for Universities and research institutions. The idea is that on this playground they will develop new technologies that will someday get folded back into the good old commodity Internet.

-Brian

http://www.internet2.edu/about/faq.html

Isn't it called the Internet 2? This is pretty much exactly what you're calling for, a high bandwidth network that is nice and elitist so you can feel superior when you're using it. Plus they don't allow the kind of advertising you see on the original Internet.

It's already happened .

Maybe this could be internet 3???

cough

1. The transfer is over a switched network that is in actual use as an internet backbone. See the contest rules for more details.

2. It is not a question of "American Pride", as this was an international team, and the article is from the BBC.

3. ???

4. Profit!

Internet2 is what the Internet was originally designed to be: a network for purely for research. It is only available to the member groups, mostly universities and major research corporations. Here's the page to the consortium: Internet2

Could Ihook up 6 PCs with 1000mb ehternet (or someething like that), call it internet 3, and thus set a new official speed record for the old school internet because both use tcp/ip?

actually there are over 200 universities and labs that use internet2. so if you don't count those several million people, then you are right.

For the purposes of the contest, they're not required to write to any media:
In computing the amount of data transferred, only data transferred from user-process-space buffer(s) in the data-source network application to user-process-space buffer(s) in the data-sink network application may be counted.

What the article doesn't mention (and it's a virtual clone of SLAC's press release) is this is part of the Internet2 Land Speed Record competition. SLAC (working with a few others) holds both the previous record and the new one.

Gee...thanks for correcting me?
Good to see you care.
Oh, and here

If you think you're entitled to use as much network capacity for as long as you want because you already pay tuition, compare network use to printer use. No-one expects to be able to print 10000 pages a day, day after day, on the department printer for free. This is because it is understood that each page costs something. The marginal cost of transit of each packet on Internet1 is non-zero: universities are billed for traffic.

Internet2 traffic is a different matter: the marginal cost of transit of a packet is zero, and there's plenty of capacity to play with.

who's actually using IPv6? I know some use it privately within their org, but are there any publicly using it?

ah, lots of people, actually... it's all over the routers and servers, nowdays... but the local network admin and network engineers are probably doing their best to make the migration as invisible as possible.

A good starting point to learn more about IPv6 would be www.internet2.edu. If you check out the corporate partners, you'll notice that ATT&T, Cisco, IBM, Intel, Lucent, Microsoft, Nortel, Qwest, SBC, and Sun are all in on the "Internet2" act, which includes the IPv6 protocol And the list of affiliated universities stretches nearly 200 members long...

Anyhow, Sun Solaris 9, Microsoft Windows2000, Microsoft WindowsXP, and Cisco IOS all have support for IPv6, as I understand... They're publicaly using it and supporting it.

If you want to know more about IPv6, check out this link and just search for the term "IPv6"... you should get about 93 articles regarding the Request For Comments (RFC) procedure used to define the protocol... As you will notice, IPv6 is a 128bit protocol, and was designed to be able to be broken up into 4 32bit packets, which allows it to interoperate with older IPv4 networks...

Moral of the story is that there are millions of people already using IPv6 on their client machines, who already don't know and don't care about the specific protocol implementations...

The article refers to an award for application developers to develop IPv6 enabled applications... If you calculate the ratio between IPv6 address and the total surface area of the earth, you will notice that there are approximately 2,000 IP addresses per square meter, with the IPv6 protocol... enough to give an address to every nut, bolt, and widget in every plane, train, and automobile on earth, with billions and billions left over... The awards will be going to people who figure out not just how to use IPv6, but how to code new applications and new uses for that kind of domain space...

The endgame is only played perfectly for positions that the computer has tablebases for (all 3, 4, or 5 piece positions, and only some 6 piece positions). However the endgame can be reached with 20 or more pieces on the board.

Computers have a reputation for being bad at endgames that aren't in their tablebase (or nearly in it). If you have watched a Grandmaster analyse an ending then this will be clear. The way the human thinks is: "Given that the pawns are like they are, I want my King here (points to square), my Rook here (points) ... and I want to stop my opponent getting his King to here (points)".

The human knows from experience and study that if the pieces are in those positions then the game is won. The computer does not know this (it is a heuristic quality that the computer may be programmed with, but humans have an advantage of being able to recognize when the position is one that these rules apply, and what the exceptions are).

The human then begins to look at sequences of moves which will end up in the pieces getting to where he wants them (and prevent the opponent's pieces getting to where the opponent wants them).

On the other hand, the computer is just exploring almost completely by brute force (positional factors mean much less, or absolutely nothing, in endgames. Computers will often rate a position as +2.5 , or even +4, when humans can see that it is clearly drawn. This even happened in the Kasparov - DJ match where the computer had a passed pawn in a rook ending and thought it was +2.5, but Kasparov knew he was safe).
The computer will only win the ending if its brute force tree is big enough that it stumbles into a tactic, or into its tablebase.

Ending play is also a good gauge of a human's strength: great players are great endgame players.

Now, onto the openings. The computer's opening book is not necessarily an advantage. Sure, the book has moves, but are they the best moves? In the Kramnik - Deep Fritz match, Kramnik analysed the book before the match and found positions that were in the book but where the book's evaluation was wrong (that is to say, the book's programmers gave a line saying "this is good for me", but the line was actually good for the opponent and the programmers hasn't realised).

Human grandmasters follow the latest developments in opening theory and are able to steer the openings into ones that they know well. The human also has the great advantage of knowing what sort of opening moves translate to what sort of middlegame positions.

Consider the last game of Kasparov - DJ. That surely was in the computer's opening book for some time. But Kasparov knew that once the opening book ran out, the computer would not have a clue what to do because the position was one in which both players have to shuffle their pieces around behind their ranks preparing for the right moment to strike. The only way to know a good move is to have experience in the positions and know what squares will turn out to be good ones once the action begins. This was reflected in the match play, the computer mucked around horribly until Kasparov was nice enough to offer it a draw.

• http://middleware.internet2.edu/shibboleth/

http://redhat.dsi.internet2.edu/8.0
And don't forget about Internet2 if you are at an I2 connected institution.

Schools need to control commodity network use (the per-bit charges of commodity providers aren't passed on to the users). QoS appliances are just a wrong way to do it.

To those who believe they are entitled to unlimited transfers from resnet because they {pay tuition|pay monthly connection fee|have a legitimate reason}: do you also think you're entitled to print 10000 pages per month on the department printer? If not, what do you think is the difference from using disproportionate share of network resources?

Commodity transfers aren't free or even cheap. The commodity ISP charges your university transit fees based on the amount of stuff that is transferred. If you're willing to let the school pass those fees down to you, it is reasonable to ask your school to let you use as much as you want. (Good LAN connectivity is a one-time expense and therefore in-campus transit is a non-issue.)

I really hope this idea does take off and soon becomes a standard in the science/research communities. Let us not forget, back whenever the Internet was still something about enhancing humanity instead of about expanding wallets, this (well, maybe not THIS exactly, but things like this in general) was the point of the Internet. The whole thing was invisioned as a way to better and expand human thoughts, ideas, and foster new/better technologies through improved and cheaper research and methods. However, now all the Internet community usually seems concerned about (With a few exceptions like /.) is getting mp3's and pr0n, hence the development of Internet2, which, hopefully will never be opened to the general public so that it doesn't lose its vision and become corrupted like the current Internet did.

If you take a look at www.internet2.edu you'll see that they've just (as of August 5) announced native support for IPv6. That certainly is cool, as it's a major step towards getting IPv6 some more mainstream use. Provided that the sites on I2 have the ability to route IPv6, this means that users at the sites will be able to get real IPv6 connectivity to other I2 sites without tunneling. Way cool.

(Of course, anybody can get IPv6 Internet access using tunnels. See freenet6.net and some 6-to-4 information.)

But I2 still isn't the 6bone. ;^)

noah

No, that is simply untrue. There is no connection between the 6bone and Internet2. They are certainly not the same thing. It's perfectly normal to speak IPv4 on Internet2. I do it all the time, as do most people who send packets between major .edu sites. Internet2 is the testbed for not only new software networking technologies, but new hardware technologies as well. There is no hardware involved in the 6bone.

Here is a traceroute that goes over Internet2:

traceroute to infopath.ucsd.edu (132.239.50.184), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 anacreon (18.24.4.1) 0.854 ms 0.510 ms 0.506 ms
2 radole (18.24.10.3) 1.505 ms 1.167 ms 1.547 ms
3 B24-RTR-1-LCS-LINK.MIT.EDU (18.201.1.1) 1.997 ms 1.409 ms 2.448 ms
4 EXTERNAL-RTR-2-BACKBONE.MIT.EDU (18.168.0.27) 1.140 ms 1.274 ms 1.366 ms
5 192.5.89.89 (192.5.89.89) 1.768 ms 1.718 ms 1.191 ms
6 ABILENE-GIGAPOPNE.NOX.ORG (192.5.89.102) 7.337 ms 6.181 ms 6.647 ms
7 clev-nycm.abilene.ucaid.edu (198.32.8.29) 20.210 ms 18.777 ms 19.306 ms
8 ipls-clev.abilene.ucaid.edu (198.32.8.25) 26.019 ms 24.682 ms 26.679 ms
9 kscy-ipls.abilene.ucaid.edu (198.32.8.5) 34.042 ms 35.163 ms 34.527 ms
10 dnvr-kscy.abilene.ucaid.edu (198.32.8.13) 46.358 ms 45.230 ms 44.955 ms
11 snva-dnvr.abilene.ucaid.edu (198.32.8.1) 69.201 ms 70.373 ms 69.657 ms
12 losa-snva.abilene.ucaid.edu (198.32.8.18) 77.485 ms 78.125 ms 77.248 ms
13 USC--abilene.ATM.calren2.net (198.32.248.85) 78.248 ms 77.353 ms 79.467 ms
14 UCSD--USC.POS.calren2.net (198.32.248.34) 81.871 ms 81.249 ms 81.188 ms
15 198.32.248.186 (198.32.248.186) 80.856 ms 81.965 ms 81.400 ms
16 node-b-msfc--ucsd-gw.ucsd.edu (132.239.255.141) 83.473 ms 82.277 ms 80.897 ms
17 muir-rsm--node-b-msfc.ucsd.edu (132.239.255.161) 82.902 ms 82.777 ms 81.225 ms
18 infopath-1.ucsd.edu (132.239.50.182) 83.200 ms * 84.386 ms

Hop 6 is where my packets enter Internet2, and hop 15 is where it leaves it. There is no IPv6 spoken along the way. Now here, just for fun, is an IPv6 traceroute going over the 6bone:

traceroute to 6bone.net (3ffe:b00:c18:1::10) from 2002:121a:12:1804:2a0:ccff:fe57:ccd9, 30 hops max, 16 byte packets
1 3ffe:1ce1:2:1804::2 (3ffe:1ce1:2:1804::2) 1.697 ms 0.391 ms 0.36 ms
2 sipbv6-rtr-sipb-ether.ipv6.mit.edu (3ffe:1ce1:0:b5::1) 509.888 ms 304.953 ms 305.882 ms
3 6bone.merit.edu (3ffe:1c00::3) 306.205 ms 305.879 ms 305.286 ms
4 rap.ipv6.viagenie.qc.ca (3ffe:b00:c18:1:290:27ff:fe17:fc0f) 306.464 ms 306.109 ms 304.732 ms
5 www.6bone.net (3ffe:b00:c18:1::10) 306.389 ms 308.274 ms 307.396 ms

Let me repeat that: Internet2 and 6bone are unrelated!

noah

I think you're confused.

The 6bone was (probably still is!) just a ipv6-in-ipv4 tunnelled network; there was never much of an actual physical infrastructure that ran it. Internet2 is a US-wide really-blazingly-holy-fuck-fast network between educational institutions. It's implemented just as a network that sits beside the Internet; institutions that are connected to it simply use BGP to prefer the prefixes they learn from their I2 link.

that said, the pictures on that site make me feel somewhat shameful about how I've done installs...

and yarr, my gf just got out of the shower and said "you're on slashdot already?" that makes me feel horrible because i'm actually posting. and i never post. dammit.

whee.

Australia

ftp://ftp.planetmirror.com/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Brisbane)
Austria

ftp://ftp.univie.ac.at/systems/linux/Mandrake/8.2/ i586/ (Vienna)

ftp://gd.tuwien.ac.at/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Vienna)
Belgium

ftp://ftp.belnet.be/packages/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Costa Rica

ftp://ftp.ucr.ac.cr/pub/Unix/linux/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/
Czech Republic

ftp://ftp.cesnet.cz/OS/Linux/Mandrake/mandrake/8.2 /i586/ (Brno)

ftp://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Brno)

ftp://klobouk.fsv.cvut.cz/pub/linux-mandrake/Mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (Prague)

ftp://mandrake.redbox.cz/Mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://sunsite.mff.cuni.cz/OS/Linux/Dist/Mandrake/m andrake/8.2/i586/ (Prague)

http://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Brno)
Denmark

ftp://ftp.dkuug.dk/pub/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Koebenhavn)

ftp://ftp.sunsite.dk/mirrors/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Aalborg)
Estonia

ftp://ftp.aso.ee/pub/os/Linux/distributions/mandra ke/8.2/i586/
Finland

ftp://ftp.song.fi/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Espoo)
France

ftp://ftp.ciril.fr/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Nancy)

ftp://ftp.club-internet.fr/pub/unix/linux/distribu tions/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Paris)

ftp://ftp.info.univ-angers.fr/pub/linux/distributi ons/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Angers)

ftp://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/linux/distributions/mandrake /8.2/i586/ (Paris)

ftp://ftp.proxad.net/pub/Distributions_Linux/Mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (Paris)

ftp://ftp.u-strasbg.fr/pub/linux/distributions/man drake/8.2/i586/ (Strasbourg)

ftp://linux.ups-tlse.fr/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Toulouse)
Germany

ftp://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/ (Esslingen)

ftp://ftp.de.uu.net/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.fh-giessen.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i58 6/ (Giessen)

ftp://ftp.fh-wolfenbuettel.de/pub/os/linux/mandrak e/dist/8.2/i586/ (Wolfenbuettel)

ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Goettingen)

ftp://ftp.join.uni-muenster.de/pub/linux/distribut ions/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Muenster)

ftp://ftp.leo.org/pub/comp/os/unix/linux/Mandrake/ Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Munchen)

ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i5 86/ (Chemnitz)

ftp://ftp.tu-clausthal.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i 586/ (Clausthal)

ftp://ftp.uasw.edu/pub/os/linux/mandrake/dist/8.2/ i586/ (Wolfenbuettel)

ftp://ftp.uni-bayreuth.de/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i 586/ (bayreuth)

ftp://ftp.uni-kassel.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i58 6/ (Kassel)

ftp://ftp.uni-mannheim.de/systems/linux/mandrake/8 .2/i586/ (Mannheim)

ftp://ftp.vat.tu-dresden.de/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Dresden)

ftp://ramses.wh2.tu-dresden.de/pub/mirrors/mandrak e/8.2/i586/ (Dresden)

ftp://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/pub/Linux/ mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Aachen)
Greece

ftp://ftp.duth.gr/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Thrace)

ftp://ftp.ntua.gr/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Athens)
Hong Kong

ftp://ftp.wisr.eie.polyu.edu.hk/linux/mandrake/8.2 /i586/
Hungary

ftp://ftp.linuxforum.hu/mirror/Mandrake/8.2/i586/
Ireland

ftp://ftp.esat.net/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Italy

ftp://bo.mirror.garr.it/mirrors/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Bologna)

ftp://ftp.edisontel.it/pub/Mandrake_Mirror/Mandrak e/8.2/i586/
Latvia

ftp://ftp.latnet.lv/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Netherlands

ftp://ftp.nl.uu.net/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/Mandrake/Man drake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.surfnet.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/Mandrake/M andrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.wau.nl/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Wageningen)
Poland

ftp://ftp.ps.pl/mirrors/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Szczecin)

ftp://ftp.task.gda.pl/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Gdansk)
Portugal

ftp://ftp.dei.uc.pt/pub/linux/Mandrake/Mandrake/8. 2/i586/ (Coimbra)

ftp://tux.cprm.net/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/
Russia

ftp://ftp.chg.ru/pub/Linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Chernogolovka)
Singapore

ftp://ftp.singnet.com.sg/opensource/linux/Mandrake /8.2/i586/
Slovakia

ftp://spirit.profinet.sk/mirrors/Mandrake/8.2/i586 / (Bratislava)
Spain

ftp://ftp.cesga.es/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Galicia)

ftp://ftp.cica.es/pub/Linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Sevilla)

ftp://ftp.rediris.es/pub/linux/distributions/mandr ake/8.2/i586/
Sweden

ftp://ftp.chello.se/pub/Linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.chl.chalmers.se/pub/Linux/distributions/ Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Gothenburg)

ftp://ftp.du.se/pub/os/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Dalarma)
Switzerland

ftp://ftp.pcds.ch/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Neuhausen)

ftp://sunsite.cnlab-switch.ch/mirror/mandrake/8.2/ i586/ (Zurich)
Taiwan

ftp://linux.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw/pub/Mandrake/mandrak e/8.2/i586/

ftp://linux.csie.nctu.edu.tw/distributions/mandrak e/Mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://mdk.linux.org.tw/pub/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Turkey

ftp://ftp.ankara.edu.tr/pub/linux/dagitimlar/Mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (Ankara)
United Kingdom

ftp://ftp.mirror.ac.uk/sites/sunsite.uio.no/pub/un ix/Linux/Mandrake/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Canterbury)
United States

ftp://ftp-linux.cc.gatech.edu/pub/linux/distributi ons/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Georgia)

ftp://ftp.cise.ufl.edu/pub/mirrors/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/ (Florida)

ftp://ftp.cse.buffalo.edu/pub/Linux/Mandrake/mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (NY)

ftp://ftp.nmt.edu/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (New Mexico)

ftp://ftp.orst.edu/pub/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Oregon)

ftp://ftp.tux.org/pub/distributions/mandrake/8.2/i 586/ (Virginia)

ftp://ftp.umr.edu/pub/linux/mandrake/Mandrake/8.2/ i586/ (Missouri)

ftp://ftp.uwsg.indiana.edu/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586 / (Indiana)

ftp://linux-cs.tccw.wku.edu/pub/linux/distribution s/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (WKU-Linux, Western Kentucky University)

ftp://mirror.aca.oakland.edu/linux/mandrake/8.2/i5 86/ (Michigan)

ftp://mirror.cs.wisc.edu/pub/mirrors/linux/Mandrak e/8.2/i586/ (Wisconsin)

ftp://mirror.mcs.anl.gov/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Illinois)

ftp://mirrors.ptd.net/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Pensylvania)

ftp://mirrors.secsup.org/pub/linux/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/

ftp://uml-pub.ists.dartmouth.edu/mirrors/ftp.mandr akesoft.com/pub/Mandrake/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (New Hampshire)

ftp://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/mirrors/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/ (Hawaii)

http://mandrake.dsi.internet2.edu/Mandrake/8.2/i58 6/ (For Internet2 academic institutions only)

First up, this is very similar (possibly even based off of) the Internet2 middleware project, Shibboleth. Incorporating similar technology such a SAML assertions. In the interest of disclosure, I am working on a setting up Shibboleth at my University as a method of allowing intra-University authentication AND authorization. So I can talk somewhat about that (although I do not in any way speak for Internet2, I do not work for them, I probably will get some details mixed up, have a grain of salt, etc.)

This is not about central authN or authZ (authentication and authorization), it is about utilizing existing auth databases and methods and allowing them to talk to each other. An example, if I may:

A student at University A wants to take a web based class offered at at University B. The two Universities have a partnership established but unfortunatly University A uses Kerberos as a central authentication tool and University B uses Active Directory (Uni B obviously never plans to scale, but I digress). Either way, Uni A is not going to give Uni B the user's password, and Uni B really does not want to add every external user who is going to take this class through the partnership.

The solution Shibboleth offers is that Uni B can simply "point back" to a url at Uni A that is protected with their central authentication system, and if the student can log in there, Uni A creates a digitaly signed certificate identifying the user to Uni B AND any relevant authZ information. Meaning that the the list of students allowed to take this class is managed by Uni A and Uni B never has to worry, the signed certificate proves all they need to know. There is obviously more to this but check out the above web site for the specifics.

The important part to all this is (1) inter-realm authentication: There is not one single database of users and authZ info, there are multiple players who pre-agree on authZ info, but maintain their own internal user databases and methods of authN. Presumably, the ability to say what the external entities can see about the users could be delegated down to the users themselves. (2) Authorization: Everybody is familiar with single sign on concepts that only prove who you are, how about ones that also say what you are allowed to do, what groups you belong to, and what access you have. DCE did a fine job of this (and Microsoft did a fine job of renaming DCE to Active Directory and calling it innovation) but it did not talk to other authN/authZ systems.

If the Liberty Alliance is as close to Shibboleth as I think it is, then it offers something we have never had before. A framework for a single sign on system that is not centrally managed, but leaves control to seperate entities that mutually trust each other.

Let's face it, when it comes to something like this you don't want all your eggs in one basket, especially if that basket has to answer to stockholders and has possibly the worst security reputation in the shory history of computing (really, I don't know why Hailstorm failed...)

This looks promising and it appears to be an approach that nobody has taken before. So don't assume it is just Sun's version of Passport, the technology seems vastly different. Specifically, it seems to be designed with the user's best interest in mind, not a single corporation's.

Finkployd

This could have some really awesome uses in Teleimmersion and Virtual Reality.

Think about the last videoconference you attended: it was probably a far cry from being face to face. Adding simple stereo vision to that probably would not do much for interacting with your peers. However, a system like the following might change things.

Here's what I'd propose, if I could build my "dream system":

Set up the following:
*Two conference rooms equipped with the cameras mentioned in the article
*Optical See-through HMDs that the users would wear
*A very fast network connection between the two locations
*Software to make it work.

This way, individuals in disparate locations could walk around, talk to each other, and do everything but shake hands. Actually, get one of these and that might even be possible :)

You would also somehow do a similar trick with the audio to enable "private" conversations between individuals sitting next to each other.

This could be the first really useful immersive application. Think about how much travel time would be saved.

Any thoughts?

I have one word for you: multicast.

Personally I think a good solution to the RIAA/MPAA problem is something like the Internet 3. The Internet2 is non-commercial. But maybe we could create an Internet 3. Similar to the "No-Homors Club" on The Simpsons, we could have the "NO-RIAA/MPAA Club" -- where in order to get online, you have to sign a "license agreement" where you state that you aren't from the MPAA or RIAA. Therefor, in order to sue you, the RIAA would have in fact had to break a contract. "By clicking here, you agree to release all your copyrights and promise to spit at Jack Valenti"

... I can dream, can't I?

Read This

Remember some of the causes of WWW 1!

IPV6 and Internet2 are orthogonal. Internet2 is a high-speed network interconnecting mostly educational intitutions. I believe the general idea is this: "10 years ago we gave a bunch of colleged kids arapnet, and we got the web. Let's give them next-generation networks and let them do the R&D to develop next-gen apps."

I2 is generally served by the same campus routers as erverything else. if the best path from you to your destination is over I2 your packets will get routed that wat. I can get 5 Megabit per second transfers between my I2 connected site and the public FTP server at the U of Michigan, over I2 links.

Internet2 page has some events and workshops that look like they might be really good deals. I registered for the IPV6 3 day workshop at the University of Utah for only $100.00 - as long as it doesn't suck, that should be money well spent.

http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ippm/draft-ietf -ippm-owdp-02.txt There is this protocol being develop called One-Way Delay Measurement Protocol which is like ping but has better features like security, it supports encrypted mode stuff like that

You know, you could actually look at the Abilene Weekly NetFlow Reports yourself. It's not like this stuff is a dark secret for our eyes only.

Example: I am at BU ans getting 6ms ping times to internet2.edu, slashdot is 22ms.

Perhaps a technical solution like the Internet2's QBone Scavenger Service can relieve the problem without limits imposed by administrators (although these administrators certainly have a right to impose limits). QBSS is like running nice(1) on Unix: you declare that you're not in a big hurry to get your data and that your traffic can be fit in around more important traffic. Of course, it requires end-user cooperation, but most users of file-sharing apps are capable of respecting the network and making a compromise.

Interesting - if you go to the Internet2 home page, I wonder if that map of the Internet2 backbone in the United States is accurate? Internet2

The reason I ask is - it looks awfully dependent upon connections located near the shores of the US. What if the US was attacked?

Linux Media Labs is another group that is providing video hardware that runs under Linux. I have seen motion JPEG work very successfully in a research environment (Internet2) and I know that the test machines are being deployed. You can find out more about the test machines that I am talking about via
Google.

Check out the work being done by the GGF Security Infrastructure team, the GGF Certificate Policy Group, and the Internet2/MACE Shibboleth projects for a start on security work and research in the GRID realms.

They have only one product* that is worth buying, and that is the OS, which costs $199 a pop. All of their other products are bundled in to the operating system as "free" add-ons. (At least until they gain enough market share for that add-on to sell it as a seperate product. Ever wonder why "WinWord" and "Outlook Express" are bundled with the OS... It's not out of the goodness of M$'s heart. It's a stepping stone to M$ Office.) Sure, these add-ons are useful and great, but try to get them to work on any other operating system.

These add-ons are sold with the operating system (and therefore their development cost is subsidised by the $199 cost of the OS), but they are not (er, do not need to be) part of the OS. There is also no _technical_ reason why they shouldn't work on any other OS. (It just needs to be linked against the right libraries...) Now you might think that these add-ons should be free (and I agree), but they do take money to develop, and thus it would take money to develop a competing product**. Netscape started selling for nearly $50 a copy, but then Internet Explorer came along, and it was "free" (as long as you paid $199 for Windows). This isn't freedom of choice, and it doesn't foster innovation and creativity.

You might say that the $199 that I paid for my OS is a great lifetime subscription to hundreds of useful little tools that work great*** on my computer, with new ones coming every year. I would almost agree, except that M$ comes out with another OS every two years, and charges another $99 for an upgrade.

If these "add-on" utilities**** really are "free" and not "part" of the "OS", then I sould be able to run them on any OS I choose. (And I should be able to reverse-engineer them, or write other clients that speak the same protocol, or write other servers that speak the same protocol... Don't get me started about M$'s back-stabbing tactics when it comes to protocol standards...)

I could use Linux for about 97% of what I do, but the other 3%... It takes too much effort to reboot back and forth, and vmware is too expensive.

* I maintain that all other M$ products leverage off of the M$ brand name in order to get a following. None of them would survive a year if the OS got out of the way.
** Open Source not included.
*** Except for BSOD.
**** Some of you have referred to these add-ons as "middleware", but see this page for a definition of middleware.

This presentation from the Berkeley network admin (Ken Lindahl) shows exactly how the BW has increased, and the problems they encountered in rate-limiting traffic.

In fact, more presentations about the BW problem at serveral universities is here. They'd like to use traffic shapers, but traffic shapers are only designed to handle T1-level traffic, not OC3-level traffic.

I saw the presentations in person (and I'm from Berkeley). They don't want to get in the business of deciding what is valid traffic, nor investing time to block the various workarounds (e.g., HTML proxies) that people will use to get around the filters.

A temporary solution is to use proxies at other campuses to send the traffic to Berkeley via Internet2, since that traffic is free and isn't being restricted at Berkeley.

I was at a Pub one evening (I live in Montreal) and I happened to meet their sales manager... ms. Jen Goldfinch. Although I had seen the Hyperchip building on many occasions, I had never inquired as to what they do. After meeting this woman, I was given the impression that their routers are actually in use by some of the big players in the digital pipelines game. She was actually pretty clear on that, although I can't seem to find any exact information concerning their customers on their website. Perhaps some questions to nortel, and qwest folks might clear this up. The only thing that make me dubious about her claim of widespread adoption, would be that if their products are so much "better" (for the lack of a better word) than the competitions, then why is abilene using cisco products? Unfortunately I don't have that kind of time on my hands.

You're excused.
Movies will be just the first wave of high bandwidth applications. Once enough people have enough bandwidth, the real killer apllications will come.
Just like the most usefull internet applications now are e-mail (including maillists) and instant messaging/chatting, the really usefull high bandwidth applications will ease communication between (groups of) people.
For some examples of applications that need a lot of bandwidth, try http://apps.internet2.edu/.
Another possibility is a version of the Sun Ray system. Imagine storing all your data (work, pictures, movies...) on a single server at home, and accessing it from anywhere in the world, using very light weight clients.

MBone is not specifically dedicated to multicasting. MBone just refers to the fact that the routers are multicast enabled. It is just laid on top of Internet2 .

The MBone FAQ can be found here. The page is a bit old but the information is pretty much correct.

Re-designing IP is more trouble than it is worth. First off, it would require deployment everywhere. So either 1) you upgrade every router, computer, etc. along the paths that need to use it or 2) you end up doing tunneling across IP anyway. Second, it works (or at least mostly works :) and provided everybody employs some sort of congestion control, it works quite nicely.

The core problem is just that you have to make everybody play nice in the network which is what the IETF is trying to do. At the same time, you don't need the overhead of TCP (sending/resending lost/late packets). There has already been quite a bit of work on making UDP-based protocols that are TCP-friendly. The problem here is just choosing what attributes to use and what the messages going back and forth should be.

Don't forget that anyone can participate in the IETF working groups. All you have to do is subscribe to the mailing list of the SIP working group and you can add to the discussion.

• An electronic delay generator that simply buffers packets;
• Fiber loops.

I wonder whether there's any signal degradation in the light that passes through the crystal.

• An electronic delay generator that simply buffers packets;
• Fiber loops.

I wonder whether there's any signal degradation in the light that passes through the crystal.

What about Internet2? Wasn't that supposed to be an alternative to the current, overloaded, commercialized Internet? I've heard about it before, but I don't see much else in the news or online. I'm guessing they're trying to keep it to only major universities and scientific organizations. That way, it will remain commercial-free.

I remember just five years ago, when I was 14 and first getting onto the Internet, the extent of advertising I saw was the mandated GeoCities ad I was forced to put at the bottom of my pages there. It was "This page is hosted by GeoCities. Get your own Free Home Page." And there was the Internet Link Exchange, which I thought was a well-intentioned, legitimate enterprise. And that was about it.

Now we've got this pop-up window crap, x10 ads everywhere, pop-under windows, banner ads, and renegade JavaScript and ActiveX which create bookmarks for you (another reason I use Netscape and Mozilla). And it sucks. Hell, I'd go back to 28.8 dial-up access from my cable connection just to have a simpler Web without ads. Well, maybe I wouldn't go that far :-P

We have the National Science Foundation to thank for allowing commercial traffic across what was then known as NSFNET in 1991. Does it really come as a surprise to anyone (especially the ACM) what has come to pass? There will be no undoing the deed that's been done.

Not even Internet2 is safe from rampant commercialism, as is evidenced here.

This addresses fundamental routing issues, so my apologies to most of you, however I think some of this crowd needs some clarification (albeit a simplified version):

To all those who are posting such things as "now all I need is fiber to my home" or "I wonder if the Slashdot effect can saturate it" or "how come my ping times to it are so slow?":

You should know that hosts on these networks are generally a mix of globally- and non-globally-accessable. Meaning, many POPs that are "hooked up" to some high-speed initiative like vBNS or Abilene also have "commodity links." Commodity links are normal T3s, etc that are hooked up to a commercial ISP. This makes the site multi-homed, and helps minimize the amount of non-research-related traffic being sent over the high-speed links, because if you want to look at www.cnn.com from, say, a vBNS-connected box, it'll go over the commodity link instead of vBNS.

So the answer is, yes: the Slashdot effect can probably affect GEANT's web site because the Slashdot effect would flood their commodity link. On the other hand, if you were at a GEANT node... good luck trying, and enjoy the pings :)

-Brian
brian@internet2.edu