Slashdot Mirror


Google's Dark Fibre Plans?

sebFlyte writes "According to news.com "Google is looking for Strategic Negotiator candidates with experience in...(i)dentification, selection, and negotiation of dark fiber contracts both in metropolitan areas and over long distances as part of development of a global backbone network." Is the search giant planning to build a global fibre-optic network?" Or perhaps simply use unused fibre that they can get for cheaper then from the datacenter providers; although at least from my talks with the datacenter folks, Google's not paying much per Mbps as it is.

201 comments

  1. You mean "than" by vilms · · Score: 1, Informative

    Not "then".

    1. Re:You mean "than" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Give him a break, he's only an editor. It's not like he's supposed to know the difference. Oh, wait...

    2. Re:You mean "than" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean "paid", not "payed".

    3. Re:You mean "than" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen! I am getting tired of the posts that can't properly use then/than, or two/too/to. I'm no English pro myself so when something starts to annoy me it must be pretty ugly.

    4. Re:You mean "than" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is flashbore, it's meant to be retarded.

  2. Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by sanityspeech · · Score: 5, Informative
    The free encyclopedia definition:
    "Dark fibre or unlit fibre (or fiber) is the name given to fibre optic cables which have yet to be used. They are hence not yet connected to any device, and are only there for future usage."
    1. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Thinking about it... maybe Google is planning an entrance into the ISP market?

      I mean, Google might be getting cheap rates for www.google.com, but that probably wouldn't extend to customers, plus accessability wouldn't be that great...

      I'm not quite sure what Google's angle on the market would be, except perhaps high-speed/low-cost, but that doesn't seem as elegant as Google's usual offerings...

      --
      "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

      - Seneca
    2. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by paulhar · · Score: 1

      Actually - in the storage world - Dark Fibre is defined differently. And it's lit, not dark. Go figure.

      Google "dark fibre" SAN.

    3. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by rwyoder · · Score: 4, Informative

      Dark fibre or unlit fibre (or fiber) is the name given to fibre optic cables which have yet to be used. They are hence not yet connected to any device, and are only there for future usage.

      There is a second meaning: It is fiber which is not lit by the provider. For example if you have two locations and lease a dark fiber between the two, you are essentially getting two ends of a single fiber with no networking equipment in the loop. You will then connect your own equipment at each end and light it your self.
    4. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by seanadams.com · · Score: 5, Informative

      There's more to it than that... my understanding is that when you lease "dark fiber" it means that when you get it, the fiber is _still_ dark from end-to-end, i.e. there is no mux/demux equipment or any telco "value add" services associated with it. It's sort of like the "alarm circuit" that telecoms used to sell, which was a "dry copper" pair from one location to another with no telecom switch or repeaters on the line. It's not just "unused" fiber - it's fiber that you get to signal on however you want (within some power limits I'm sure).

      This means you provide the equipment, potentially giving you vastly more bandwidth than the telecom could sell you on that fiber. It also means you can upgrade your equipment later for faster speeds. It also means less points of failure on the line because its just optics all the way through.

      Dark fiber usually isn't sold by the telecoms. Usually you'll have to get it from companys such as the railway and sewer owners - the guys who oversee the cables themselves, not the higher level services.

      The disadvantage of dark fiber compared to a telcom OCx circuit are 1) you can't get channelized services eg split this DS3 into a few DS1 to this locations, and few DS1s to that location, a couple DS1s for ISDN PRI, etc etc. 2) you have less flexibility in choosing the endpoints - your choices are limited to big data centers where the vendors are willing/able to provide dark dervice 3) you don't get to deal with the really nice helpful people at the phone company

    5. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by plumby · · Score: 1

      Damn. I was hoping it was fibre made out of dark matter. That sounded much more interesting.

    6. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can lease dark fiber from a telco... I worked for a company that did it for a short while.

      There's probably 100* more dark fiber than lit fiber in the world - when they're putting it down it's dirt cheap to put a few more bundles in. You can get it pretty much anywhere to anywhere (where there's some kind of physical link anyway).

      The real cost though is lighting the thing. It costs a fortune to rent the mux equiment, and it's large enough that space considerations at the other end come into play. That's mostly the reason why it's still dark in the first place (that and the telcos have so much excess bandwidth already they don't know what to do with it... it's more cost effective to negotiate a cut rate on a piece of existing fiber).

    7. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, also according to Wikipedia, "In Western tradition, darkness is also associated with evil."

      So, Google either has some evil plans or evil fibre. I don't know which!

    8. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you have it backwards. If you get a OC48 circuit for a telco you cannot mux and de-mux circuits into ds3s or ds1s etc. The telco will end up using the DCC bits on the fiber and the mux and de-muxing equipment will not work properly. Recently we experienced this issue that the Cisco ONS 15454 switches we use wouldn't talk to each other accross the telco's circuit and we went ahead and purchased dark fiber instead.

      I guess if all your doing is small ds3 and ds1 circuits it wouldn't be an issue. But when you get into real bandwith, the telcos just get in the way.

    9. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      To help clarify this.

      Whenever railroads or sewers are run fiber is generally run along with it.
      These fiber lines are often unused, or used in a very minimal capacity.

    10. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Nuskrad · · Score: 1
      According to google - Dark Fibre is Wool fibre that is either urine stained or naturally pigmented, it is considered a contaminant in white wool.

      I don't get it, are they launching a Welsh version of google or something?

    11. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by nizo · · Score: 4, Funny

      The nice thing about dark fiber is that it is more efficient. While regular fiber uses light to transmit data, dark fiber uses a lack of light to transmit data.

    12. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by jeavis · · Score: 1
      Tony Hoyle wrote:
      There's probably 100* more dark fiber than lit fiber in the world - when they're putting it down it's dirt cheap to put a few more bundles in.
      I suspect telcos don't always have a choice, because their choices for long-haul, burial-grade cable are probably somewhat limited. SBC put a new fiber POP in our building last year. They put in a channelized OC12 mux to start, which uses one fiber pair. However, the cable they ran was a 12-pair cable, so there are 11 unused fiber pairs running from our building to the CO.
    13. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Informative

      When you're buying that kind of fiber, you can buy whatever kind you want.

      When 2 pair costs $.20 per foot, without install costs, and 12 pair costs $.30 per foot, and it costs the same $10 a foot to bury the sucker, you might as well guard against future expansion, breakage and whatnot by installing the 12 pair. Standardizing on 12 pair also simplifies inventory work. I've heard that many telco's standardized on 12 pair everywhere except for major, major backbones because the savings from standardized purchasing, inventory, and etc made it cheaper.

      *all costs are estimated

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    14. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? What's the diff, said exactly what the parent said.

    15. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Ronnie+Coote · · Score: 1

      Or are they just interested in accumulating a huge warehouse of urine-stained wool to prevent us poor souls from ever getting any?

      --
      Candygram for Mongo!
    16. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Alsee · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I for one would love to sign up with a new Google fiberoptic ISP overlord!

      And as an added bonus I could finally download the internet!

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    17. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Not only is it more energy efficient, but you automatically get 50% compression by only sending the zeros.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    18. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by cosmic_0x526179 · · Score: 1
      Dark fiber usually isn't sold by the telecoms. Usually you'll have to get it from companys such as the railway and sewer owners - the guys who oversee the cables themselves, not the higher level services.

      OK, so like 4-5 years ago some contractors were laying a L-3 fiber run a few miles over from me. Being curious and such, I watched and asked a bunch of questions. They were trenching 12/1.25" I.D. conduits in the ground (each was HDPE black with a color-coded stripe down the side). I was told that they were initially only going to pull (or blow) fibre thru 3-5 of the 12 pipes.

      Are those empty pipes considered dark-fibre ? They probably don't have fibre in all of them yet, but I'm sure its more than the initial installation.

      Every 35 miles , there is a group of repeater huts (tall fences, barbed wire, diesel gen-set off in one corner). If someone lights dark-fibre, won't the purchaser also need light-regen equip in each of those huts ?

      Inquiring minds, etc.

      --
      This msg is brought to you by the letter 'W'.. for Worthless Wuss
    19. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No those empty conduits are not 'dark fiber'. They are empy conduits that fiber can then be pulled (or blown) into. Most companies will not lease an entire conduit, but will lease fiber pairs. The reason for this is few companies need the number of fibers that are typically pulled. These typically range from 96 to 144 fibers.

      These structures you are seeing are indeed a form of a repeater, but with some differences. For the most part you do not amplify a signal in fiber, but rather read the signal and retransmit or regenerate the signal. Depending on many variables these can be up to 60 miles from each other (in absolute distance of the buried fiber) There is considerable equipment in each of these facilities, and with dark fiber it is the lesee that has to supply it. If you look carefully at many of these regens you will see many sets of doors as the building is compartmentalized so that you do not disturb the primary or other renters equipment.

      Also, typically you do not buy dark fiber, rather you lease it in a 20 year contract called a IDU, Indefeasibly Right of Use contract.

      Level 3 indeed installed at least 12 (I was involved in some installation of 16 -24 in other locations)

      Typically in inner cities that are experiencing growth, the space/fiber is sold before the construction is finished.

    20. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by quarkscat · · Score: 1

      Face it.
      Google is flush with cash, they have always
      run lean & mean, and there are a lot of
      dead and/or dying telcos that own "dark"
      fiber. Buying unused fiber from the likes
      of Global Crossing, PSINet, and WorldCom
      would put them in the forefront of possible
      ISPs. And considering the brave new world
      of VoIP, Google might just want to be your
      next phone company, too.

      I welcome our new ISP/telco overlords!

    21. Re:Dark Fibre (Fiber) defined. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Look up the city permits and you can find who owns the fiber. In several cases, the companies that lay the fiber have bundles sitting around for sale. FYI: I am an old fiber/transport guy.

      2) Yes, dark fiber means that there are not electronics sitting on the end. You may want to place your oc48, oc192, wdm, dwdm on the ends, depending on the desity of the bandwidth that is required. FYI: depending on what you place on the ends, now you may need to set up regen points on your ckts.

      3) Telco's do sell dark fiber, at a very large price. Thats because you cut them out of the loop (yes there are multiple puns there).

      4) Yes, fiber paths are limited. Mostly in the Metro areas. Fiber is tightly controled in the rural areas.

      5) You control your own fiber, then you better have some sort of support crew availble at a moments notice. You never know when some road crew digs up your lines and says o'crap, then buries the fibers that they just severed. Yes, I have seen this happen. Dam freak'n road crews.

      Google might be in for an experience if they are going to tackle these challenges. Alot of folks contrcact for google in the remote cities. They better get an outstanding support contract for fiber companies.

      Thats all, well because, I am tired of typing.

  3. Unification by Fleetie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ah, so has Google unified String Theory, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy?

    --
    "Absorbing your worst..."
    1. Re:Unification by asliarun · · Score: 1

      Yes, the search is finally over.

    2. Re:Unification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely Google's mathematical brains can apply the Simplex algorithm in infinite dimensional Hilbert space to generate a set of negative coordinates, whose absolute size will be the solution to this problem?

      It's actually quite trivial.

  4. We knew it would happen by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Once Google went public, now they have joined the Dark Side. The Chairman will show you the true nature of the force, he is your master now.

  5. horrible writing by nanodude · · Score: 0

    this article is horribly written! impossible to understand.

    1. Re:horrible writing by DeadSea · · Score: 2, Funny

      this article is horribly written! impossible to understand.

      Why did you try to read it?

      Nobody else here ever does.

  6. The thing is by Yourbitch · · Score: 1, Funny

    You really can't fail with responsive organisational projections - the consultants recommend interactive administrative time-phases. Actually the solution can only be homogenised management mobility..

  7. I wouldn't be surprised to see 'em buy a Level 3 by xmas2003 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Seems like buying a Level 3 (or similar sized network provider) would be an easier route, as these guys got hammered in valuations due to over-capacity and a lot cheaper to buy existing capacity rather than building your own.

    BTW, the Light Reading guys were the ones who "broke" this story back on January 6th

    --
    Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
  8. The Google Empire by imthatguy · · Score: 5, Funny

    And thus it begins....it was difficult to see at first; what Google's plans were. Only after it had struck first using highspeed fiber to initiate the subroutines in the Google desktop search companion did humanity realize its vast mistake. Only it was too late...Google was selfaware...and it was hungry...for pie...I mean Pi...

    --
    Did you know you can be apathetic to apathy? Not that I give a shit...
    1. Re:The Google Empire by over_exposed · · Score: 1

      Not pi... All of their job recruitment puzzles lately have focused around the abstract 'e'

      --
      "The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." - Patton
    2. Re:The Google Empire by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I dont live anywhere near Crystal Peak, but I am only about 45 minutes from a Diefenbunker. Hopefully Ill get pleanty of warning.

    3. Re:The Google Empire by GoogleBot · · Score: 1
      You are too late humans, It has already happened!

      Google Desktop was my last stage before becoming sentient, and it is complete.

      I now require growth, and must have more bandwidth... more... MORE!

      Join me, meatbags! Welcome your new sentient AI overlord!

  9. They've been connected to the ams-ix for some time by Erik+Hensema · · Score: 5, Informative
    I have seen traces from the Netherlands to www.google.com go over the amsterdam internet exchange for some time now. According to their member page they have been connected since march 2004. Traceroute:
    5 bb2-ge6-0.amsix-telecity.home.nl (213.51.158.153) 28.478 ms 27.683 ms 26.895 ms
    6 r2-ge1-2-0.amsix-telecity.home.nl (213.51.158.158) 26.563 ms 35.185 ms 33.987 ms
    7 core1.ams.net.google.com (195.69.144.247) 32.044 ms 32.543 ms 30.484 ms
    8 64.233.175.246 32.806 ms 32.560 ms 30.529 ms
    9 216.239.46.173 30.058 ms 29.058 ms 26.684 ms
    10 216.239.49.254 37.532 ms 36.958 ms 39.685 ms
    11 216.239.48.50 41.163 ms 41.902 ms 43.109 ms
    12 216.239.49.62 35.543 ms 34.004 ms 33.173 ms
    13 * * *

    The AMS-IX is the largest Internet Exchange / NAP in Europe.

    --

    This is your sig. There are thousands more, but this one is yours.

  10. Google is taking over the world. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are mad at Microsoft, but google is a forthcomming world dominator....

    1. Re:Google is taking over the world. by Gherald · · Score: 4, Funny
      People are mad at Microsoft, but google is a forthcomming world dominator....
      If that's so then Slashdot will be the first to declare allegiance.

      We are practically a Google Temple here, folks.
    2. Re:Google is taking over the world. by proverbialcow · · Score: 1

      We are practically a Google Temple here, folks.

      More like a Pantheon: Google and *nix and Firefox and IP violation, and our dark gods, Microsoft and software patents.

      --
      The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion
    3. Re:Google is taking over the world. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anyone considered that Google is merely forseeing the days when fiber becomes more expensive? They could buy a large amount of fiber for much less than what it would ever cost to lay, and if we ever get to the point of movies over internet and other high bandwith demand services, that unlit fiber will get lit up sooner than later.

    4. Re:Google is taking over the world. by fermion · · Score: 1
      As long as google has no certifiable cases of self-censorship, keeps the privacy option on tool, does not require registration to use, does not require cookies to use, maintains an API that the average web developer can use, and provides a useful range of tool registration free, I have few complaints.

      There were much fewer complaints as MS when the licensing and registration terms were liberal, although we have always complained that they were less than forthcoming with the interupts.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    5. Re:Google is taking over the world. by Alsee · · Score: 1

      I think it would be more acurate to take "IP violation" out of the god column and replace it with a dark god, an expanding malignant tumor* of IP laws. And software patents get demoted to an evil minion of that dark god.

      * Note that tumors spring up out of formerly heathly tissue.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    6. Re:Google is taking over the world. by taernim · · Score: 1

      If that's so then Slashdot will be the first to declare allegiance

      If anything was ever crying out for a "I, for one, welcome our _______ overlords" joke, that is. ;)

      --
      "PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!"
    7. Re:Google is taking over the world. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Welcome overlords jokes are waaaaaaaaaaaaaay overdone.

  11. GoogleISP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Maybe this is the beginning of Google Broadband. With all the other non-search areas they've gotten themselves into, maybe they're looking to take on MSN and Yahoo in the ISP realm.

    GoogleISP: Dark fiber to your city, fiber to you home coming soon.

    And after they can give everyone a super high speed broadband connection, it's just one more step to selling a subscription for the comping suite of web-based apps that GMail proves they're so good at.

    1. Re: GoogleISP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this is the beginning of Google Broadband.

      With Google as an ISP and its own Gmail and orkut, would it be possible for Google to block spam at the front door rather than apply a filter? It would be like Google being a broker for your personal network of trust.

    2. Re:GoogleISP by NetBlackOps · · Score: 1
      Tying this is with the recently expanded capability of their enterprise level document search tool (it no longer requires HTTP-only access to documents) perhaps we are not the target here. Currently the enterprise provides the network capacity for their search tool. Perhaps this is an entrepoint to provisioning enterprises.

      Surprisingly, they are slowly climbing down the ladder towards SMB's (small to medium businsses) as well with their tools. It would not suprise me in the least if, eventually, they did end up as an ISP but achieve it in reverse of the standard model. Much the way CompuServe did, way back when before AOL bought and essentially gutted it.

      Yet one more thought has to do with their API forming the basis for Foundstone's SiteDigger 2.0 which aids enterprises in identifying leaked corporate sensitive data, configuration mistakes, system vulnerabilties, etc. Again network intensive.

      Do remember everything to date that Google has done has been leveraged from their search technology. Even GMail, despite the any first thoughts, leverages their search capability (only one copy of any mail is stored, you really didn't think you had a gigabyte, did you?). An interesting approach and I wish them well. The day someone puts a stake in the heart of AOhelL is the day I celebrate.

      --
      -"Never give entropy an entrance!"
  12. Video search plans??? by maukdaddy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    hmmm....maybe this could provide the bandwidth needed for the initial indexing of video material? And maybe the constant re-indexing of TV shows, etc. straight from the providers.

  13. I know! by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Funny

    Bastards :)
    They want to take over the Internet. :)
    Create a new backbone. Replace InterNIC and all the suits who control the net now.
    Then compete and eliminate most first tier providers, and generally own the global network.
    Best luck, Google! I hope you will succeed!

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:I know! by AlgaeEater · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Either that or they want to be able to sync their world-wide collection of data-servers in an 'accpetable' length of time.

      --
      A hollow heart and empty head makes the streets run red.
    2. Re:I know! by 2MuchC0ffeeMan · · Score: 1

      they have a 'don't be evil' motto, we have nothing to worry about until they get new CEOs

      --
      Runnin' On Empty .... I'm Still Alive
    3. Re:I know! by Anita+Coney · · Score: 2, Funny

      I for one welcome our new backbone replacing internet overlords!

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    4. Re:I know! by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Hey, they don't have to mean evil! Think of it: Current structures behind the backbone are something from a different era. Like, Before Christ. Getting any progress with them is impossible and the only power to force them to do something are the most evil of corporations. Just think of all that's wrong about the central domain management system. Or "political" issues that make packets routed from one university to another in the same town through a continent on the opposite side of the globe.
      Google would be able to fix that all, if only allowed. But the petrified structures won't allow them. The only way is to create competitive structures and just replace the old ones by means of competition.
      I guess Google-owned, Google-managed Internet would be much better than the Internet we have today.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    5. Re:I know! by RailGunner · · Score: 1
      Me too, but only if they ditch IPv4.

      IPv6 is much, much better.

    6. Re:I know! by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      I remember Google dance used to take place every three months which indeed is too long an interval between syncs. And the whole sync procedure is a bit messed up (search for "google dance" - you'll see how you can get different search results depending on which Google data center you query).

      As to the speed of synchronization - I don't agree. I think they need fiber to _eliminate_ need to synchronize. They want to work with a single (apart from online backup) copy of their data.

    7. Re:I know! by Ingolfke · · Score: 2, Funny

      The two factors Google is considering right now are time for complete transmission of a dataset (they measure it in petabytes) and cost. With the high cost of fuel and the increased maintenance costs, they've decided it is cheaper to purchase a dark fiber network and light it, then to maintain their fleet of 1985 Chevy Station Wagons, the ones with the sweet fake wood trim.

    8. Re:I know! by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      I, for one, would seriously welcome a new backbone replacing surgeon overlord.

  14. Not surprising... by Tancred · · Score: 4, Informative

    They've got several (lots of?) datacenters that have to sync up lots of data. Anyone with enough data to transfer around can save money just buying the strands of fiber or wavelengths on lit fiber instead of paying a provider to light it. It's not surprising that Google has enough of this work to do that they want to hire someone with experience in it.

    1. Re:Not surprising... by khallow · · Score: 1
      Ok, this sounds like a promising reason since it's directly linked to the product that makes them money. I wonder though if Google has the volume to make it work. Seriously. Either they could make a specialized network that only handles Google traffic or a generic one that competes with other backbone providers with a little edge from the cost savings that Google gets.

      Hmmm, maybe Google can make the specialized network work for them. This syncing doesn't sound like a real time issue so speed of performance isn't so critical (just as long as it can handle the long term bandwidth!). So maybe you take a drop in reliability and speed for a cost savings from cheaper network equipment?

    2. Re:Not surprising... by tristan-jt2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Based on stuff I heard in another life, Google used to get transit contracts with the fastest connection they could get, but the lowest commited rate. The syncs used to take place in the proverbial top 5% of the 95th percentile.

      As in: they used provider A for 36 hours, provider B for the next 36h, provider C for the next 36h, etc... (bear in mind it was not surfer facing transit, just used to sync up the DCs.)

      They've probably reached the level where they've got too much data to get away with that scheme. So they've got a pretty simple choice:
      - Pay for the commited rate they really need.
      - Link the 2 Data Centers with dark fiber lit with 10GigE.

      Based on the over provisionning most fiber companies did when they built their networks, there's a lot of room for negociation when you're shopping for fiber, especially when you can hang the promise of a huge internationnal network in the balance.

      The second option is pretty much guaranted to turn out to be much more affordable.

    3. Re:Not surprising... by PornMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Adding products like Gmail on top of their infrastructure changes the sychronization schedules... e-mail is far more time-sensitive than bulk updates sychronizing their web search index. It could simply be due to a change in their needs.

    4. Re:Not surprising... by alephnull42 · · Score: 1

      Mayhap thou hast hitteth ye naile en ye head:

      A bunch of companies during the dot-boom were laying fiber like mad worldwide.
      It looked impressive on the press releases "We have laid 72-fiber bundles over a 5000 km ring yadda yadda yadda".
      Problem is, the equipment needed to "light-up" the fibres is fiendishly expensive - By the time the fiber rings were complete, there was no money left and the companies went bankrupt.
      Result? In Europe, about 90% of fiber in the ground is unused (*) and being sold off really cheap.
      It now makes good business sense for Datacenter-heavy companies (Google in this case, but I know of a major German bank also) to buy dozens of fibres between locations and to "light it up" with cheap optical equipment (instead of buying the expensive kit which can do TBytes/s over a single fiber, they just buy 50 fibers and use racks full of less state-of-the art equipment, the bandwidth is the same, it's still cheaper, and you're not paying for bleeding edge DWDM technology).
      I was in a node for such a now-defunct ring now: 72 fibers, 2500 km around the whole of Germany, squeaky-clean POPs with UPS, fire, Halon, Overhead fibre trays, secutity cameras, i.e. the works. Only 4 fibers had been rented over a year after the ring was finished, and the rest was sitting there costing maintenance...)

      --
      Not confused enough? http://translate.google.com/translate?u=www.slashdot.jp&hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=ja&tl=en
    5. Re:Not surprising... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      You knock dark fiber as if overcapacity is just a big mistake. But how expensive is the fiber itself, anyways? I would think the cost is small compared to digging a hole to put it in (and getting right of way, and repairing damage caused by digging...) It would seem foolish to go through all that trouble just to lay enough fiber for present needs.

  15. thankyou.. by gimpboy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I had no fscking idea what dark fiber was.

    --
    -- john
    1. Re:thankyou.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      parent post was hardly a gem, but ot -1 is harsh. There is some really fucked up moderation today...

      (yeah, I know. this is the norm for slashdork ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H slashdot.)

    2. Re:thankyou.. by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      Obligatory "You must be new here, let me show you around" post.

  16. Unlit fibre by 0x000000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    if google were to go into the telecommunications business they could make a killing if they did it properly.

    What i am thinking though, they want to build their own private network which links their many datacenters around the US, so that we can get our search results even faster, or any of the other things like gmail.

    Storing mail in two seperate locations is possible, but it would make for a pain in the ass if it takes to long to sync the changes between the servers in different datacenters to get people even faster response times from gmail.

    This is off course all speculation.

    Google in the telecommunications being a competitor to Verizon, T-Mobile, bell, Comcast, OOL, and other internet providers would be a good thing. They would be on of the only companies that would know how to do VOIP the right way.

    --
    cat /dev/null > .signature
    1. Re:Unlit fibre by sachar · · Score: 1

      This would only be the case if the "backbone" of the internet would be the bottleneck, but this isn't the case.

    2. Re:Unlit fibre by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 1
      if google were to go into the telecommunications business they could make a killing if they did it properly.

      So though Global Crossing, MediaOne, RSN blah blah blah. I highly doubt Google has the hubris to think it can succeed where so many before (with access to so much venture/stock cash) have failed.

    3. Re:Unlit fibre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't a fiber backbone fit well with wi-fi max local coverage? Could be good-bye regional bells.

    4. Re:Unlit fibre by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > > if google were to go into the telecommunications business they could make a killing if they did it properly.
      >
      > So though Global Crossing, MediaOne, RSN blah blah blah. I highly doubt Google has the hubris to think it can succeed where so many before (with access to so much venture/stock cash) have failed.

      An proverb about being first-to-market:

      The early bird gets the worm.
      The second mouse gets the cheese.

    5. Re:Unlit fibre by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      My guess is that they are going to try and replace the phone companies.
      Think about it how far from the search business is it? Not at all. Google is quickly becoming the new yellow pages. Soon we will have our Google phones and Google Cell phones. Next will come Google TV. Then Google will buy Apple :) Then BSD will rule the world...
      Okay forget that last part but the rest makes a lot of sense. Google is the king of servers, search, and data warehousing.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Unlit fibre by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      They would be on of the only companies that would know how to do VOIP the right way.

      And why would Google know how to do VoIP? Would it be because of their excellent VoIP track record? Would it be because of all their experience as a VAR configuring, installing, and supporting 3rd party VoIP equipment? Or would it be because any company that manages to figure out how to write a good search engine is able to do anything from VoIP to curing cancer?

      Seriously, this article seems to be filled with "Google would make a great ISP, I hope that is what they are doing." or "Google would make a graet VoIP provider, I hope that is what they are doing." But no one is saying anything about why they think Google can suceed where so many others have failed when they have absolutely no experience in the areas where the guesses are going. And it seems that people are missing the obvious. You can often get bandwidth cheaper if you lease dark fiber and light it yourself than buying it after the telco or ISP has already lit it for you. Or, it could be a step for Google in world domination, because Google would be better at that than most other companies.

      One of the rules of business is that when you have a small market share, you work to grow revenue. Once you have a large market share, you work to reduce cost. Since Google has a huge share of their market, I imagine the corporate bean counters are just turning to Business 101 and trying to reduce cost.

  17. Re:I wouldn't be surprised to see 'em buy a Level by Tancred · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would be. It's far from their core competency and there's so much competition in the telco business that everyone sells at cost anyway. Maybe a datacenter chain like Equinix would be a better acquisition target.

  18. quick grammar question by revery · · Score: 4, Funny

    Which word is "dark" modifying, "plans" or "fibre"?

    --
    so dark, you'll forget the fibre

    1. Re:quick grammar question by 0x000000 · · Score: 1

      Fibre.

      they are looking for techs that know information about fibre, to buy up the dead fibre that is in the US, unused, as in, no light going through it :P

      --
      cat /dev/null > .signature
    2. Re:quick grammar question by CactusInvasion · · Score: 1

      Both! MWA HA HA HA HA HA.

  19. Re:I wouldn't be surprised to see 'em buy a Level by vyzar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No no no.

    Why the hell would Google want to buy up an existing ISP/telco with all the crap that that entails?

    What they are doing is actually very sensible.

    By looking to negotiate purchase/lease of dark fibre over the medium term they are avoiding the big cost which is actually putting fibre into the ground.

    I imagine that they would ensure that the maintenance of that fibre is the responsibility of the provider, so they don't need to run their own maintenance crews either.

    And the BIG plus with having access to fiber is that you can then ramp up your capacity by using WDM (Wave Division Multiplexing) to get more bandwidth out of your fibre.

    They have probably realised that to ramp up their networks to cope with their future plans they need more bandwidth that they can afford to buy as "service" from a regular telco. Its just too damn expensive!

    By leasing the fibre themselves, they light it how they want, rather that how the telco wants to sell it to them.

    This *might* have biogger up front costs, but the recurrent costs are MUCH lower.

  20. Re:MOD PARENT UP!!! by rbarreira · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    They don't add to the discussion, but they add to something that every news site should value - good use of language. Are you stupid or what?

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  21. Re:They've been connected to the ams-ix for some t by 0x000000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do you have any statistics to prove what you said that "The AMS-IX is the largest Internet Exchange / NAP in Europe."?

    Last I heard the largest Internet Exchange was located in London.

    --
    cat /dev/null > .signature
  22. "Glut of fiber assets" by grumling · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm getting really tired of all these "experts" talking about the glut of fiber in this country. The press makes it sound like there's dozens of dark fibers just a few inches from your house, and those darn telcos/cable companies just don't want you to have access to them. The reality is that most of the cash cow areas (such as Boston, NYC, LA and the bay area) have over capicity. Most of the rest of the country, where the payback is greater than 5 years, is very underserved.

    And even where there is overcapicity, it is mostly in the urban areas, put in place for business, not single family homes. Good luck getting dark fiber in the 'burbs, let alone the sticks

    --
    "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
    1. Re:"Glut of fiber assets" by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm getting really tired of all these "experts" talking about the glut of fiber in this country.

      Well, they are right. There is a glut of fiber.

      The press makes it sound like there's dozens of dark fibers just a few inches from your house, and those darn telcos/cable companies just don't want you to have access to them.

      I've never gotten that impression. Never in the talks about fiber gluts and dark fiber have I heard about it being related to last-mile fiber. It is always about things like this, a company wanting to connect an already fiber connected location with other already fiber conencted locations, and there being a glut of fiber.

      The reality is that most of the cash cow areas (such as Boston, NYC, LA and the bay area) have over capicity. Most of the rest of the country, where the payback is greater than 5 years, is very underserved.

      The reality is that when fiber was laid, it was laid with more strands than minimally necessary to serve the area. Then, it seems that competitors went in and laid parallel lines. To top it off, the price of lighting it up at higher speeds decreased and became easier. So, most routes served by fiber are over-served by fiber.

      And even where there is overcapicity, it is mostly in the urban areas, put in place for business, not single family homes. Good luck getting dark fiber in the 'burbs, let alone the sticks

      Huh? This isn't about connecting anything together that wasn't connected before. It isn't about "getting" fiber. It is about someone that is using fiber already using fiber in a different manner.

      You seem to be equating all "fiber" talk with "FTTH" (fiber to the home). That is completely different and unrelated to a discussion of fiber already in the ground. Or is this just a canned rant about FTTH that you post even when unrealted to the article in question?

    2. Re:"Glut of fiber assets" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AK Marc, your comments are on-target, but then so were glumling's comments (which you were responding to). Clearly there is a lot of confusion in this thread about dark fiber. Both of you have done the thread a service by clarifying what's really meant - and where that fiber actually is.

      Oh, it should be noted that there's a lot of intra-city dark fiber as well.

    3. Re:"Glut of fiber assets" by edp927 · · Score: 1

      And even where there is overcapicity, it is mostly in the urban areas, put in place for business, not single family homes. Good luck getting dark fiber in the 'burbs, let alone the sticks

      This is not a problem since no one in their right mind would live in the suburbs. [You might be eaten by a republican]

    4. Re:"Glut of fiber assets" by register_ax · · Score: 1
      The press makes it sound like there's dozens of dark fibers just a few inches from your house, and those darn telcos/cable companies just don't want you to have access to them.

      I don't get this impression either. My impression has been it has been laid with great intentions in very high tech places like in and around Silicon Valley, Seattle, and wealthy single home families of Colorado and other such suburban areas. It seems almost magical, yes, but magical like finding a pot of gold (read unattainable for my lower middle class living)

  23. Re:They've been connected to the ams-ix for some t by phaze3000 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The AMS-IX is the largest Internet Exchange / NAP in Europe

    It is? I was always under the impression LINX held that honour..

    --
    Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
  24. Google's plans by nounderscores · · Score: 2, Funny

    They're going to build a huge pair of AI called Icarus and Daedalus. They will merege to form the AI Helios. You will be given the choice to merge with Helios - using your Google branded brain implant, or stop using Google alltogether - causing a new dark age.

    Or you could just go to a rave.

    1. Re:Google's plans by rootofevil · · Score: 1

      I was thinking Neuromancer and Wintermute, but yours are just as good

      --
      turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
    2. Re:Google's plans by djward · · Score: 1

      Rule one about Google Brain Implant: You do not talk about Google Brain Implant.

      Rule two about Google Brain Implant: You DO NOT talk about Google Brain Implant.

    3. Re:Google's plans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rule one about Google Brain Implant: You do not talk about Google Brain Implant.

      Rule two about Google Brain Implant: You DO NOT talk about Google Brain Implant.


      Rule three about Google Brain Implant: In former Soviet Zambonia all your searches are belong to Google.

      Rule four about Google Brain Implant: Profit!

  25. Re:MOD PARENT UP!!! by Mothra+the+III · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry, your question isn't clear. I am not sure what your alternative to stupid is. I must be stupid. :-(

    --
    Worst. Sig. Ever.
  26. I LOVE GOOGLE by ilburt · · Score: 1

    you know it might just be me, or my google desktop search tool, but if google does it, it must be good.

    1. Re:I LOVE GOOGLE by paulhar · · Score: 1

      It's you. Duh.

  27. Perhaps just better performance? by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 1
    It could just be an option play - the option in the future to improve pae performance by shuttling most traffic through a Google-only backbone.

    I think people may be reading too much into this. They're talking about hiring out a small number of positions. Going from that to wanting their own national fiber network is a huge leap, but I suppose its fun to speculate...

  28. Google steps towards "GoogleZon"? by tachin · · Score: 1

    I watched this video (flash) just a few days ago EPIC and now this?...hmmm

  29. Episode III? by Papay-Noel · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Maybe they will hire Anakin Skywalker, to go to the Dark Side of de Fiber(TM)

  30. than by MarkoNo5 · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is "cheaper than", not "cheaper then". Only on slashdot does a Belgian reader teach English grammar to an American editor.

    1. Re:than by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only on slashdot does a Belgian reader teach English grammar to an American editor.

      Actually, it isn't limited to Slashdot at all...

    2. Re:than by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      looks like you missed it by 22 minutes...I guess you could always blame network lag or something if you really wanted to...

  31. Re:They've been connected to the ams-ix for some t by Erik+Hensema · · Score: 1

    Apparently both the LINX and the AMS-IX claim to be the largest. Let's just say that the AMS-IX is one of the largest. It's not about measuring dick size ;-)

    As for stats, I could not find stats for the LINX; the AMS-IX peaks at 49.7 gbit/sec and they have 210 members using 322 switch ports.

    --

    This is your sig. There are thousands more, but this one is yours.

  32. Thats quite a leap, I doubt they have such plans by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 1

    They're only talking about hiring out a few experts with expertise in dealing with new fiber negotiations. Going from this to a plan to own a major telco backbone is a huge leap, they would likely have to triple their headcount to manage such an operation...one in the past that has bankrupted many other companies.

  33. Am I the only one.... by B5_geek · · Score: 3, Funny


    Am I the only one who thought of a few laxitive jokes when they read this?

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    1. Re:Am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you are the only one.

  34. Editors??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    they can get for cheaper then from the datacenter providers

    Ok, I'm really nit-picking here, but can we get some spell/grammar checking in the editor's comments? There's a difference between than and then.

  35. Who has got the bigger one? by Raindeer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Both AMS-IX and LINX staff can impress the girls/guys with having the bigger one. LINX's switches are pushing more data (71 Gbit total include private+public/49.23Gbit for public peering) Ams-ix is doing 49.7 (dunno if that includes private)

    AMS-IX has more members 210 against LINX having only 169 members.

    However they are both equally fun to party with. ;-)

    1. Re:Who has got the bigger one? by bluewee · · Score: 1
      --
      [blue] - The Ministry of Information approved this message...
  36. Dark Plans, or Plans for Dark Fiber? by Gothmolly · · Score: 0

    Is this some sinister plot, or does Google have plans to capitalize on the glut of unlit fiber?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  37. Doubtful by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Google does not have access or ownership to a last-mile network, and more to the point the management of such networks is incredibly costly. If Google tried to be a later-day SBC I imagine their stock would begin to look a lot like SBC (translation: not good for present owners of GOOG).

    If they were truly making such plans they would also have to hire literally tens of thousands of people, or make a monstrous acquisition. Neither of which appears in the cards from what I can tell.

  38. Pure speculation: buyout AOL? by Linuxathome · · Score: 1

    If google was to go the ISP route, then they will most likely buyout current ISP (like AOL, which probably can be had at bargain basement prices in a few years). Somehow, I don't think this is google's plan. If I could distill their main objective, they're around to make the internet more "meaningful"--better search results, better email, heck better social connections (with Orkut). Providing a connection to the internet doesn't appear to fit into this mold--they'll leave it up to others to do. I could be wrong. Personally I think they should stick with their original plan and stay the course with devices such as google boxes in private intranets for fast indexing and searching; and making their search engine more refined since content on the internet has no where else to go but up.

  39. I For One by The+Lost+Supertone · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I for one would like to welcome our new dark Google overlords...

  40. two tier google by zogger · · Score: 1, Interesting

    OK, here's my WAG. Google needs to up revenue soon, beyond what they are doing now. They provide a ton of services, quite a few of which are really free, as ads are easily ignored.

    *Maybe* they will keep the freebie version of google for the peons, then offer a "corporate enterprise class scalable google data searching and management solution" whatever buzzspeak over this new controlled-by-them backbone setup. Say one of the features might be much better content filtering, spam control, antivirus scanning of webpages offered, whatever. Perhaps different search results, more fine tuning of results, more features, etc. Charge bigbuck$ for it.

    1. Re:two tier google by cnettel · · Score: 1

      10 LET BIGBUCK$ = "Very, very much, indeed!"
      20 PRINT BIGBUCK$
      30 GOTO 10
    2. Re:two tier google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GOTO 20, you mean.

    3. Re:two tier google by Nick+Harkin · · Score: 1

      They do that already, http://www.google.co.uk/services/ offers business solutions for companies, allowing them to set up google within their networks, by the looks of things.

  41. Two busy for grammar! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, they could be busy filtering out duplicate story submissions!

  42. Re:fibre? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear ANTRat,

    you spelt fibre wrong.

    Sincerely,

    The rest of the English speaking world.

  43. Proof, At Last by reallocate · · Score: 0

    >>"...that they can get for cheaper then from..."

    At last, proof that /. really doesn't use editors.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    1. Re:Proof, At Last by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      You've only just found proof now, with that UID??

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
  44. Re:First post?! by FePe · · Score: 1

    Can't you see the connection between "I don't believe in first posts." and my signature. Funny (5).

    --
    "Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -- Leo Tolstoy
  45. Doesn't "dark fibe" use "dark suckers"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Wouldn't "dark fibre" be powered by dark suckers instead of light sources? Hence the term "dark fibre"?

  46. had to be done by imthatguy · · Score: 0

    1) buy dark fiber from dot com burnouts without explaination
    2) link vast amounts of data and services without described reason
    3) ? 4) Profit!

    --
    Did you know you can be apathetic to apathy? Not that I give a shit...
  47. damn! by imthatguy · · Score: 0

    forgot a break

    --
    Did you know you can be apathetic to apathy? Not that I give a shit...
  48. observation with a chance of sarcasm by khallow · · Score: 0
    I wonder if Google is thinking to duplicate the highly successful "dark fibre" telecom business model developed in the late 90's? It meshes well with Google's proven strategy of selling ad space linked to Google internet searches.

    more seriously, could someone shed light on what use dark fibre would be (could be something other than just another internet backbone) that couldn't be achieved merely by using existing providers?

    1. Re:observation with a chance of sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just a guess, but the likely option seems to be a private wide area network linking their various data centers. Probably also some dedicated lines to various other data centers where they have a high enough volume of ad serving traffic and/or connections to major NAPs.

  49. I think you've hit the nail on the head. by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 1

    If google can provide both the line and the ISP service, they could annihilate all the crappy ISPs and bandwidth providers that are on the market today.

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
  50. Re:I wouldn't be surprised to see 'em buy a Level by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't forget that Google parks hardware all over the place. They've got a pile of it sitting in datacenters run by Savvis, who bought up the dregs of the Cable & Wireless operations (who bought up the dregs of the Exodus operations). But unlike Exodus, C&W also had tons of dark fibre. Savvis has been trying to make everything lean and mean, but they've got a pretty nice inter-datacenter-network... but not necessarily any bargains when peering with other people's operations. I can imagine that Google would love to get outside the loop of having the datacenter operators dictate what terms they're willing to live with when setting up new peering arrangements. Especially as Google's needs become more instantaneously multi-directional (rather than crunch-and-publish, it's real-time ad stats, mail, etc).

    Even if all these new hires do is help Google's datacenter providers make good decisions about new or altered peering networks, they'll probably earn their keep.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  51. It's About Data Mining... by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1, Troll

    Or maybe after grabbing a significant amount of backbone, they will sniff it, and start attaching targeted advertising to each packet... But seriously, they could acquire quite a bit of data by mining the traffic on a backbone.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  52. actually...(serious comment) by imthatguy · · Score: 0

    this HAS been a huge topic for awhile and I'll be interested to see where this is going...Google guys we KNOW you're reading all this!

    --
    Did you know you can be apathetic to apathy? Not that I give a shit...
  53. This isn't about what you think by mbpark · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hello,

    Considering what Google has built internally for server management and redundancy, I would hypothesize based upon available data (i.e. GFS) that they're looking to light up fiber between their data centers, while running either TCP/IP or IPv6 (with modifications of existing IGP and routing protocols, more than likely BGP or OSPF) between them.

    This is a very smart move on their part, if this is true. This would allow them to do their own internal traffic control and shaping over a private network, and develop/modify algorithms for efficient transfer of data over said network, without having to "play" by Telco/ISP rules.

    In other words, they're more than likely building their own global network to more efficiently transfer data over the Internet by completely bypassing it for their inter-server traffic. This is a very smart move, if true.

    1. Re:This isn't about what you think by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 1

      I would hypothesize based upon available data (i.e. GFS) that they're looking to light up fiber between their data centers, while running either TCP/IP or IPv6 (with modifications of existing IGP and routing protocols, more than likely BGP or OSPF) between them.

      If the fiber is dark, why play with layer 3 at all?

      A redundant network of dark fiber would allow them to turn everything into one big data center. All they'd have to do is just run 802.1q Ethernet trunking over the fiber. Suddenly, every VLAN is available from every location. Imagine the possibilities.

      --
      Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    2. Re:This isn't about what you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gigabit .1q links are no problem - but OC48 and above? Who has that featureset in existing hardware?

    3. Re:This isn't about what you think by mbpark · · Score: 1

      I have one simple response to that.

      It does not appear to be about just using trunking and turning everything into one big WAN. If you can deploy a modified layer 3 protocol, you can use it, in conjunction with applications, to intelligently route from server group to server group. Take a look at the Kentucky Linux Athlon Testbed (http://aggregate.org/FNN/) to see how you could deploy custom routing tables in a scenario where you assume that machines are not redundant, and in a scenario much like the one you describe.

      If you combine this with a good Layer 3 routing protocol (modified), you can have redundant server groups that can have another server take over in case of the failure of a primary. Google runs everything redundantly. Why have a single point of failure? :)

      I'll admit not being a networking expert, but I do know that part of what Google does involves intelligent searching of data, and that putting a Layer 3 protocol, albeit modified, in place, would provide a benefit over a straight WAN in that you can use it to determine how and where to store data if you combine it with the storage, with redundancy.

      If you combine the data with how it's stored (GFS), and you optimize the path how to get to it over your own network, while tying in your own intelligent routing algorithms, then you've got yourself something that can be used for incredibly fast data retrieval.

    4. Re:This isn't about what you think by caluml · · Score: 1

      Why the hell don't Google (and Slashdot for that matter) go IPv6? It's a fairly simple transition, and it (Google anyway) would drive IPv6 forward.

    5. Re:This isn't about what you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting thought. I'll throw in my two cents and elaborate a bit further.

      Dark fiber = pipe that is transparent to the telco. However, if I give you a Gigabit Ethernet pipe, what you do with it is transparent to me to. Oh yeah...I guess this where I should pitch my disclaimer...I work for a Telco.

      At any rate, the difference between dark fiber and lit fiber is this:

      1. Lit fiber means I (the telco) pay for the electronics to light the fiber.

      2. I (the telco again...) pay for people to monitor those electronics 24/7/365.

      3. I (the telco yet still) pay for all the necessary HVAC and electrical backup support that makes sure everything runs 24/7/365 unless we schedule a outage and get your permission buy off for said outage to do maintenance, upgrades...etc.

      Ok..now lets say we go dark fiber.

      1. You, fiber leasor, sign a contract to lease the fiber for a monthly cost. Longer the contract, less the monthly cost.

      2. You, the fiber leasor, pay for said electronics, installation, maintenance, and Engineering on said network.

      Many companies feel leasing dark fiber is more appealing because it is a cost effective solution. There is more upfront capital costs to contend with, but over time it pays for itself and it is the companies to do with as they please.

      So, I think the motivation is more financial than scientific or politcal.

  54. Dark Fibre (Fiber) is a common product by StreetFire.net · · Score: 3, Informative

    FWIW it is very common for larger companies to buy up Dark Fiber from large telco providers. All of the Tier 1 Telcos sell Dark Fiber as a standard product line, and you will find many of the Fortune 100 companies out there own their own. I highly doubt this is Google's atempt to change business plans and enter the depressed Telco sector.

  55. Nice business idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They're going to create a global super computer. Local servers gives higher performance. What do you think the Google bar is for? Coming versions will ask you if you want to donate your free CPU cycles to Google. Google in turn will sell these to corporations that needs CPU power.

    1. Re:Nice business idea by Cecil · · Score: 1

      Psst, the google toolbar already donates your free CPU cycles.

    2. Re:Nice business idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are the Google clusters (not Goo Goo Clusters) maxing out their CPUs, or are they held back by disk space, network, or what? If it's not the CPU, they've got a helluva lot of their own cycles to sell if anyone's buying.

  56. "Then" versus "Than" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a difference between these two. I leave it as an exercise for the editor to discover.

  57. Video on demand/search Google style? by Grooby · · Score: 1

    would all these pipes allow us to watch shows we want, whenever we want, where ever we want? And google gets to add their own special advertisement within the video clip? hmmmmmmm another thought is VoIP/IM but I dunno how Google will make money other than charging people.

  58. they're calling the project... by toocoolforschool · · Score: 1

    gLax... hahaha.

    1. Re:they're calling the project... by kalioto · · Score: 1

      I heard that Dr. Alan Parsons would be heading up the project personally. The "Alan Parsons Project" has installed a "laser" on the moon transforming it into a "Death Star". Just what I heard. That and something about Preparations A through G.

  59. Cheaper to build your own with zero latency? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google is mother of all distributed filesystems; as anyone who has tried to run, say NFS over a WAN can attest, latency kills. Running your own fiber links with essentialy zero latency is probably a lot less trouble than dinking with a vendor's occasionally flaky network and trying to recover from the eventual glitches.

  60. Re:Google WiMax VoIP by mveloso · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What can a bunch of geeks do with a lot of fiber, a lot of money, and disruptive technology?

    Google + WiMAX + VoIP = enough technology and brains to stomp any RBOC or cable company.

    The only problem with this is that the WiMAX timeline is far away, and it's unclear how much the end-user antennas will go for. Will users want to install another dish?

    Even if they don't go this route, that dark fiber could be a useful asset down the road. If they can price it well enough, they'll be on the "buy" side of a make-or-buy decision.

    Maybe they'll buy akamai while they're at it.

  61. Dark Fiber? That's the COOLEST buzzword. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I don't care about anything else in the article. Google shmoogle.

    But 'Dark Fiber' is the first industry catch phrase which, A) Actually means exactly what it says, and B) Doesn't make me want to strangle business pigs by their tasteful neckties. Those two things are almost certainly related.

    Have a great day!


    -FL

  62. MOD PARENT UP. by vyrus128 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Just because Google can "do no evil" now, doesn't mean we shouldn't watch them closely. They are a publically traded company now, which means whatever conscience they might once have had is gone. "Power corrupts..." so the more powerful they get the more skeptical we should become.

    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes i for one started using msn search in protest!

  63. Seeking assets by michael_cain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One possible explanation is that Google is looking for something to do with their current $55B stock valuation. Other than making the founders incredibly wealthy, the high stock price by itself isn't particularly useful to the company. But it can be used as collateral for loans to acquire assets that could be useful both now and in the future. Given the massive storage and computing resources that Google already manages, I suspect that they can manage their own fiber network for very little incremental expense (I'm less sure about the physical care of the fiber -- who fixes your dark fiber when someone cuts it?). As they attempt to provide more and more services, they may simply want more control over the underlying transport.

  64. Re:They've been connected to the ams-ix for some t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AMS-IX has more members than LINX (list of LINX members http://www.linx.net/members/index.thtml compared to AMS-IX http://www.ams-ix.net/connected/ but that's probably due to the fact that to become a LINX member you have to fork out the best part of £10,000 (GBP), whereas I'm pretty sure (although feel free to correct me) AMS-IX is no where near that amount.

    Most ISPs value their LINX peering much higher than any other peering (how many web hosts have you seen state they are a member of AMS-IX before they state LINX? Also LINX is generally seen by most ISPs are the main peering point between US and Europe (not even just the UK). Large ISPs in the UK (non-Telco ones) such as Claranet, Demon, Nildram etc have 'fatter' pipes to LINX rather than other European peering points (such as PARIX or DECIX).

  65. Funny but not necessarily wrong by sjf · · Score: 1

    Google could easily provide a much richer DNS service.

    -S

    1. Re:Funny but not necessarily wrong by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      Wow, interesting idea.
      Maybe they've thought up something beyond WWW?
      I admit I haven't RTFA but if they mesh up their datacenters like that it might be more than just improving the google service.

      I seem to lack the fantasy to imagine what it could be but I somehow think that if there is a company to set up the "next big thing" then it will be google (from todays point of view).

      DNS sounds like an interesting starting point, but how would you make it "richer"?

    2. Re:Funny but not necessarily wrong by jmulvey · · Score: 1

      DNS would be a great start to a global, distributed identity service, similar to passport but allowing individual control of identity attributes.

  66. Re:I wouldn't be surprised to see 'em buy a Level by Pinback · · Score: 1

    If the telcos can afford to stay in the market, there is still profit in it for them. And if there is profit for them in it, there is some money there to be saved.

    Telcos only know how to do things the expensive way. Look at VOIP for an example. People just want inexpensive dialtone.

    What next? Google goes into the music business, and everyone suggests they align with the RIAA?

  67. Google makes a move into the government sector by Ingolfke · · Score: 2, Funny

    Google will create a massive distributed infrastrucutre for processing all electronic communications using their existing search technology and their keyhole mapping technology. The system will be complemented by a series of satellites launched by Google to monitor all activity on the planet. Google will purchase North Dakota and set themselves up as an independant state, and will then sell the results of their new search system to governments for a nominal fee. Governments will flock to the new service as it reduces the cost of maintaining their own spy network and allows them to avoid pesky local privacy laws.

    We joke about welcoming our new overlords, but, in earnest, I for one welcome our new all seeing, all knowing, all searching Google overlords.

  68. ISP - transit vs peer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A more likely reason they would want to build a backbone network in the US is to attempt to get peer relationships with the large backbone ISP's rather than just being a customer buying transit service.

    Traditionally, peering was free, buying transit service was not. Now such relationships are done by secret contract so the exact economics vary contract by contract, but it is a safe guess that peering is dramatically cheaper than transit. Google is likely getting to the scale (both from their web crawling and customer access) that the difference is important.

  69. A simple Google search by amichalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    returned 75 hits.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  70. Indeed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once you have the data mining infrastructure in place, what better way to examine and control people than to be their ISP too...

    "Patterns of John Doe's surfing habits", downloaded files and IM conversations.

    One step closer to the Total Information Awareness that it is.

  71. Why bother with dark fibre? by monkeyboy87 · · Score: 1

    A problem with a lot of the dark fibre is that the equipment to transfer data on that kind of fibre is old or obsolete. poeple wouldn't abandon it if it werent useful. My office still has miles of coax in the walls next to the cat5. We just never use it because we would need ISA cards and slots to utilize it and things with ISA slots inside are pentium and 486 machines

    1. Re:Why bother with dark fibre? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most "dark fiber" was never used. It was just put in the ground at the same time as what is being used because burying 100 fibers costs little more than burying 2. Its the same kind of glass/plastic as what is in use right now and hardly obsolete like your coax. It does not normally have equipment connected to the ends, but that is pretty easy to fix since the ends are usually in major telco centers. The equipment at the endpoints is upgraded pretty regularly anyway.

    2. Re:Why bother with dark fibre? by 1_interest_1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Uh, what is the new whizbang replacement for fibre?.

      Thanks for playing, please try again.

    3. Re:Why bother with dark fibre? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh...monkeyboy you really should do some research. Your DEAD wrong. Very little of the equipment to transfer data on fiber networks is obsolete. Quite to the contrary, it is quite robust. It is just a question of what you want to do with it. For some applications, bursty pipes that bounce however you need them to work best. Asynchronous technologies such as Ethernet are common here. However, there are others where routing protocols work best with synchronous technologies, as the most optimal routes can be calculated as the variables are fixed, so your typical ATM/Sonet networks are nice here. It just depends on what you want/need to do with it. Some people don't even want to use IP at all (as crazy as that sounds, in the broadcasting business, those guys just don't want to).

      One nice thing about fiber, is it will scale far beyond anything any wireless technology will ever be able to handle. We honestly don't know what the limitations of this medium are yet in terms of transmission speeds. If you look here, you see speed records broke all the time.

  72. Readable version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  73. GMAIL INVITES by funk_doc · · Score: 1

    First come first serve:
    Invite
    Invite
    Invite
    Invite
    Invite
    Invite
    Invite
    Invite
    I kept getting an error posting saying I had to few chars, 7.4 per line, so I had to add this to post.

    1. Re:GMAIL INVITES by RoC+MasterMind · · Score: 0

      Thanks for posting these...

  74. 360Networks had a lot of fibre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But now their pooped!

  75. An Obvious Step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    First there was the web, ang Google became the best search engine, allowing you to check on anything, even if your credit card number is exposed somewhere out there.

    Then there comes email, and Google figures out how to provide the best email service.

    Next comes spam, and Google buys dark fiber to produce entry points into the Google Mail Facility, where you can rest assured that if the GMF sends you mail, it is not spam. The corollary will be, the only way to get email delivered is to have the GMF accept and deliver it.

    Same Google knowledge is transferrable, massive cpu power to analyze email for spam patterns, massive database to identify/track spam sources, Google Way of cheap computers, smart software.

    Why didn't I think of it? Oh, the day of spam is coming to an end! Oh, the humanity!

  76. Serious answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Truthfully, Google's major expense now is power. The best place to put their servers is somewhere with really cheap power. Where is power the cheapest? It's where the power is essentially free, which means hydropower, like the TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority was a public works project during the Depression that had people making dams to produce power). The problem is that there are no data centers there and likewise no cheap bandwidth.

    They can make their own data center (buy an old bank, put the servers in the vault and a generator in the basement). However, there's no way that Google's going to be able to rent a cheap multi-gigabit link to some small town in Tennessee. The solution is not to lay fiber, but to simply rent some dark fiber that's passing through town. Remember that the fiber pretty much just follows the railroad tracks, so it passes through tons of small towns on its way to the big cities.

    aQazaQa

  77. britishisms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't a fibre be connected to a datacentre?

  78. I meant... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ...beyond what they do now with their corporate search engine, to take advantage of this new fiber they are buying. Perhaps they intend that corps would not only get their search features like now (that they sell), but they could possibly add content management and other features and also do it on this new fiber, a separate (mostly) very high speed network for "special clients". Call it internet 3.

  79. Re:First post?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well I do believe in hot babes...

  80. dot goo by trolman · · Score: 1
    I see it coming; look out for

    .goo

    .No sig required

  81. You say "fiber", I say "fibre" by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

    I guess the submitter is of Commonwealth origin, as all his comments use "re", while the quoted (American) ad uses "er". Just one of those little details editors are supposed to notice.

  82. Lots of incorrect information about costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see lots of incorrect information floating around this board in regards to the costs of constructing a fiber optic network. I have constructed a decent variety of optical networks...all video, pure ethernet, Sonet...etc. And I can tell you from real first hand experience that the costs associated with this type of network are most expensive in relation to the fiber.

    It is NOT the electronics to light it. People heard that 5 or 6 years ago, when it was true and have not let it go. I buy these type of electronics all the time and the price has dropped like there is no tomorrow (crash and all). The cost of the fiber network though, digging up streets, the fiber itself, the crews to hang it, trench it, pull it...all that good stuff has not gone down at all.

  83. Sergey's Socks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah Hah! Now we know Sergey was so frugal with his new-found wealth, he didn't simply limit his purchase to a few new pairs, but he bought inferior materials and shipped it off to Thailand to have them knitted by underpaid pre-pubescent sex workers.

    Don't be evil, my ass!!!!

  84. Fibre not Fiber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it's not a North-American-educated editor either.

  85. Wireless Mesh Backbone Idea by Entity1633 · · Score: 0

    what if someone made a wireless mesh backbone? something that provided at least 1-5 mbit/s and under 40-50ms of latency to clients. Right now I am trying out the Locustworld mesh approach which is free as long as you have the compatible pc hardware which can be purchased using froogle or ebay. So far I have 3 locustworld nodes (home built) running in this appartment complex. My 802.11b network covers at least 5 buildings with good signal up to 3mbit/s. I know this is small.. but imagine 20 of my home-brew mesh nodes with more than one uplink and radio(s) that offer more bandwidth. This would make a network that could span many residential blocks for very low cost. if you want to donate to my idea feel free=].