Slashdot Mirror
NetBSD Sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record
Daniel de Kok writes "Researchers of the Swedish University Network
(SUNET) have beaten the Internet2 Land Speed Record using two Dell 2650 machines with single 2GHz CPUs running NetBSD 2.0 Beta. SUNET has transferred around
840 GigaBytes of data in less than 30 minutes, using a single IPv4 TCP stream, between a host at the Luleå
University of Technology and a host connected to a Sprint PoP in San Jose, CA, USA. The
achieved speed was 69.073 Petabit-meters/second. According to the research team, NetBSD was chosen 'due to the scalability of the TCP code.'"
"More information about this record including the NetBSD configuration can be found at:
http://proj.sunet.se/LSR2/
The website of the Internet2 Land Speed Record (I2-LSR) competition is located at:
http://lsr.internet2.edu/"
...but don't the three main BSD projects use pretty much the same TCP/IP stack?
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Fools, BSD is dea . . . oh, wait, what?
trustedworlds.net - gaming, security, and the gunk that lives in between
They will still get slashdotted.
How does that work?
Does this mean we've broken the "station wagon loaded with DVD's" barrier yet?
We can now DoS sites at even faster speed !
This signature was left intentionally blank.
cleaning their pants out? I'm also dusting off the old BSDemon shirt.
-- the only good thing the French ever did was two chicks at one time
What is a petabit-meter? How is it a significant measure of transmission speed?
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
when UDP has so much less overhead?
Did they check for any inband compression? They data they're sending isn't randomised.
840GB/30 minutes = 466 MB/s, or 3,728 Mbps
SUNET Internet2 Land Speed Record: 69.073 Pbmps
Now give me my carma..
What was the slogan of the recent pro-piracy demo in Sweden? "Vi vil har sex, vi vil har sex, vi vil har 600MBit!"?
Somebody should show Valentini this, I wonder what he'd say...
Val: "You students transfered how much?"
Sunnet: "About 30 movies a minute"
Val: "Un-fucking beli-Oh wait, I already said that..."
..transferring 840 gb of swedish porn across the pond. ;)
Use Minidisc? Join the Minidisc.org forums.
When is this supposed to be available for the average joe to use?
Also, what measures (if any) have they taken to combat the current internet's limitations and vulnerabilities?
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
My guess is that it's petabits times meters (as in physical distance between the machines). Which seems kind of stupid -- if the distance makes any real difference, something is wrong. How about communicating with Voyager II -- then you could get some real numbers, even at modem speeds!
Plus, I'm betting it's not a "land" speed record, seeing as how the data probably jumps through the air (satillite/microwave transmissions) at one or more points. (Not to mention the fact that being on, over, or under the surface of land or water means nothing to a data cable.)
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
"According to the Internet2 LSR contest rule #5A, IPv4 TCP single stream"
vodka, straight up, thank you!
(((840*1024)/30)/60) = 477.86 MB/s or 3,823 Mbps
Sorry, but I've seen much higher rates of it than this.
If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
I've heard that joke, "never under estimate the bandwidth of a 78 chevy and a box of hard drives," but now I don't know about that one anymore.
So, is this just using a secure connection on our internet, or did they go ahead and string up an all new internet for no one but theirselves to be on? I don't really see the point of the latter - why not dump the money into vastly improving the current internet and stomping out spammers and things that make the place bad?
SecondPageMedia - Wha
Perhaps because they wanted the data to arrive reliably?
UDP just sends off the data without caring whether it actually arrives intact at the other end, you know. TCP, on the other hand, actually gives delivery guarantees...
We need to get to the point where the only limiting factor is the human in front of the computer. I hate waiting for my computer, whether its downloading a file or waiting 2 seconds for a web browser to start. Everything should be instant - I am excited for the day that nothing happens on a computer slower than I can think about it. A 2 hour HDTV movie is about 20 gigabytes - download it to me in less than a second and prompt me what to do next.
Re: your sig...
;)
To provide more relevacne for the band you might want to use something like the following:
Googling up my brother's Acid Metal band, Ahymsa
Google places more weight on the text that's actually inside the link
Actually, they data transfered across Sweden, part of Europe and then the United States which (according to them) took up 10,157 miles total.
I suppose this may be a troll, but you just have to RTFBlurb to see that the transfer was between a university in northern Sweden, and one in San Jose, CA, USA.
Read the Fucking Summary ;)
if you take a look at map, you'll notice that san jose is kinda far away from sweden.
That depends on whether the DVDs are in cases or not I think.
At 9.4 GB per DVD (Assume single-layer double-sided DVD-R), and a travel time of 3 weeks from Sweeden to California (2 weeks on the boat, one week of driving), you'd need to get about 90,000 DVDs in your station wagon to get an effective 1680 GB/hr. That wouldn't be possible if they were in cases, but if it was just the DVDs, it's probably a close call. Might have to upgrade to dual-layer DVD's, or change the saying to "an SUV full of DVD's".
On the other hand, if you count the time to actually read the data off of the DVDs (even worse if you count the time to put the data on the DVDs too), the station wagon of DVD's barrier was broken long ago - you probably couldn't spin a DVD fast enough to get 9.4 GB of data off it in 20 seconds.
paintball
Everything should be instant
I bet you were a little shithead when you were a kid.
I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a somewhat useless measure? I mean, I suppose that the longer a link is, the more interference, but really, seems like a rather pointless mesure to me.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Not only did you not RTFA, you didn't read the *slashdot* article:
"between a host at the Luleå University of Technology and a host connected to a Sprint PoP in San Jose, CA, USA."
This wasn't across Sweden, it was across the Atlantic Ocean and North America.
This was just node to node.. when they build a network that 1 billion users can simultaneously transfer data TO EACH OTHER at 100 Mbps (yes I'll be happy with Mbps) .. wake me up.
S.
if internet2 is so fast, then why do you want to replace internet4 by internet6 instead of internet2?
;)
It took me a few seconds to realize he was confusing IP with Internet. After that I said it was impossible to send email over internet2 and he seemed quite satisfied with the answer
sig(h)
Notice that you accidentally dotted an "a", you cursive-writing moron! If you would just print like a regular person, that would never happen.
True story.
still held by Norway
sulli
RTFJ.
I2 isn't going to replace the Internet some day, it's more of an acedemic playground not a construction project.
Man I hate to be on the recieving end of a Denial of Service attack on Internet 2. 900 gigabytes of data /30 min from multiple sourses would be crushing.
Veramocor
Actually google doesn't index a lot of /. because there aren't enough inter article links to find all the articles and because google just gets the default page setup a lot of comments are hidden, not to mention Google only indexes a certain amount of dynamic data from a particular site to avoid causing what was once called "the google effect" when a poorly designed web app on a slow server would be hammered as google crawled the catalog.
Theres no way you're gonna get 840gigs of Necrophilia porn on the internet.
Don't forget, we're talking sunet.se. I used to archie tons of porn off there more than 10 years ago. If anyone's got it, sunet does.
I remember the same thing being said about the actual Internet back in the mid-late 1980s. Academic playground, won't amount to much.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
well depends on how many tapes but a rough guess is... 10000 tapes * 20 GB / tape = 200000 GB 200000 GB * 8 bits/byte = 1.6 petabytes 1.6 petabytes * 30 m/s = 48 petabyte-meters/second
how about we get 1MBS real downloadspeed in everyones home before we go shooting porn to reach ISP owners at the speed of light.
Hey buddy. Even on a 56k modem, you're still downloading your pr0n at pretty much the speed of light.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
More precisely, it went from
San Jose CA to
Stockton CA to
Kansas City MO to
Fort Worth TX to
Pennsauken NJ to
Relay MD to
Chicago IL to
New York NY to
Manasquan NJ to
Tuckerton NJ to
London UK to
Brussels BE to
Amsterdam NL to
Hamburg DE to
Copenhagen DK to
Oslo NO to
Stockholm SE (where it changed carriers) to
Vasteras SE to
Gavle SE to
Luleå SE.
Or maybe it was the other direction; the site doesn't say clearly which way the transfer was.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Cool, I live in Luleå, I actually have my internet connection supplied by the university. I wonder how long before I can get Internet that fast.
They Stole Sprint's DS-3 cards!
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
How different is the Linux stack that the *BSD stacks? Is there that large a performance difference?
And a better question, if NetBSD has a better stack, why doesn't Linux just adopt it? After all, it *is* BSD license..
Or is it just good old pride getting in the way again?
One of the biggest problems in networking is handling a large bandwidth-delay product (that's the amount of data in flight at once). Since distance increases the delay it is relevant.
If anyone cares, a connection with a large bandwidth delay product is sometimes called a long fat pipe. A good networking book should discuss this. I think Steven's TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume 1 has a section on it(my copy is at work.)
(S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))
Any thoughts on why they chose to use Dell 2650s?
They might claim that NetBSD scales best, but it took some code changes to get it to do so (which have since been picked up and are included in the base).
:-)
The REAL reason for why they picked NetBSD is that Ragge (Anders Magnusson), the person doing a fair chunk of the testing, is heavily involved in the project and knows the code base. It was simply easiest to work with for him.
Yes, but what would the throughput have been like if it had been to MARS? We really need to be preparing our protocols for interplanetary distances after all.
Very impressive. I have few questions, though: how does it compare to quantum units? Could NetBSD be used as a basis for cheap routers in New York?
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Haven't the swiss already beating this?? CNET
All the cool scientists are using Gibibytes ;)
" How about some evidence of that? Where is this 512 way smp machine running linux?"
Thought I was bluffing, did you? :-)
It's the SGI Altix. In a linux-kernel post just today, an Altix user says that "Overall, linux scales to 512p much better than I would have predicted." This system runs with Itanium-II processors BTW.
So there you go, Linux handling a 512-way box tolerably well. Linux screams on an IBM 64-way box, with Xeon or Power 4 processors.
This has got to be one of the worst arguments ever created by man. we would probably be a few hundrded years ahead in terms of technology if people didn't ever use this argument. Here is one: If Linux is so good why isn't everyone using it?
Creative Demolition
Take a look at readable tcp dump and you'll notice that it is just the ascii character set shifted continuously. Now if you NEVER need disk access then this could be usable (aka isp and router junction points) but once you hit disk you are bottlenecked. Even with U320 SCSI you can only hit 320 MB/s (~2.5Gbit/s) assuming linear reads at full cacity of your full array of disks.
Disk is limiting pretty much anything, such as playing raw 2K video (2048x1556) in real time (seconds is relatively easy but minutes is difficult). I could care less how fast your network speed as when 1 non-solid state device (ie. disk) is entered into the mix the network performance is notional compared to real performance.
"Survival of the fittest Max, and we've got the fucking gun!" - Pi
Where could this geographic genius get such a myopic view of the world from?
Slashdot: Where nerds gather to pool their ignorance
Hi, Anyone out here have any experience with TCP performance over CDMA1xEVDO link (1.2Mbps limit). I've been hearing a lot about W-TCP which improves the performance of TCP over wireless links like this...but never saw any implementation..anyone have any idea?
Do you really mean GigaBytes or are they really Gibibytes?
Phillip
I didn't realize Priceline had expanded into the data transfer business.
Rank Presidents by th
I think the 850GB was cheating.because the pc's harddrive and bus don't have such power,and maybe the cpu can't have such power and bandwidth.
,but the difference may be omitting
I think even a windows or linux may achive a high record,though yet even lower than it
Funny that you write Vasteras and Gavle (which in swedish are Västerås and Gävle) but Luleå.
Living in the US? I mean, it's not like I would be able to pinpoint every major city in the EU. And then again - the EU has 25 member countries and the US 50 states.
And by the way, it would be nice to know if all data actually went directly between Luleå and Gävle, or if some of it took the other way through the northern ring of GigaSunet (that is, through Umeå (you remember those pirates demonstrating?)).
Geek rants since like... 2000 or something.
Did anyone else notice the latency of 276.138 ms? Sure, you could pump 1.5 Terabytes per hour, but can you plant the bomb in de_dust?
Luleå was the only one I saw referred to in its native alphabet; I inferred the other two from ASCII-only node names, and merely checked that they were (sometimes) spelled that way on the web.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
lets see... if the station-wagon has a usable volumen of 1 m^3 ( 1000 litres ) and the harddrives have a size of (15*10*2.5) cm^3 and store 120GB, and the wagon does 80mph then the speed of the data is:
87.3125 Petabits*m/s (1.2288142 * 10^16 byte-meters/s)
proof, see here
Meme of the day: I browse "Disable Sigs: Checked". So should you.
The same goes for doing a copy on transmission. BSD has generally hidden a software checksum and/or copy in the driver, because older hardware didn't support scatter-gather and checksum. Linux didn't hide it. Note that checksum comes free (seriously!) when doing a copy, since you need to access the memory anyway. Now that cards with scatter-gather and checksum are common enough to care about, Linux can take advantage of this feature for "zero-copy transmit". (obviously, the network transmit is itself a copy and the whole point of doing a transmit)
Zero-copy receive, in the BSD style, is a way to kill SMP scalability. It involves remapping pages, which leads to cross-CPU interrupts to invalidate the old mapping. It's cheaper to copy the data.
Quantum Virtualization, aka QV (c)(tm) by me.
Now where did that cat go..?
What a brilliant article!... eh, from 2001. :-)
/* Steinar */
(This comment is of course GPLed.)
Relay MD
I don't know about you, but for some reason I have this image of Relay MD being nothing more than a Cisco router out in the middle of a field somewhere.
On the other hand, it can't possibly be any worse than the original...CAN IT?! ;)