Slashdot Mirror
New Data Transmission Record — 14 Tbps
deejne writes to alert us to a new bandwidth record: Nippon Telegraph and Telephone has announced data transmission at a rate of 14 terabits per second over a single optical fiber. The paper claims the previous record was "about 10 Tbps." In the new experiment, NTT sent data over 160 kilometers (nearly 100 miles) of optical fiber, in 140 channels of 111 Gbps each.
And still nothing worth watching.
vista.windowsupdate.com?
I thought it meant 14 ThePirateBays per second...
liqbase
Well, I remember back on my 14.4 modem... those text pages loaded like the wind. I was on top of the world... Then those damned pictures started cropping up on websites. Pictures on the internet? Ha! Then came the 56.6k modem which showed those pictures who were boss. No problems. Oh wait, online gaming? File sharing? Cable and DSL save the day. More than adequate... so now this time it seems we got the good speed coming up before the need for it. Its like always being busy all week and never having time to do anything, and then they make you cash in your vacation time. Now we have to find something to fill it up!
That's still nothing compared to a semi loaded with DVDs traveling at 70mph.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
and yet I'm still downloading at a measly 300 kbs.
Maybe a solidly-lit LED, always-on (1/true), would be faster than the switch?
A Lightbulb network is infinitely quick. When will physical matter be the limitation of transmission? Maybe this limit can be overcome by moving data in the past, into a DeLorian, and transport it to the future all at once? That's faster than SneakerNET(r)!
Why does the experimental speed of data transmission have to be around a million to ten million times faster than what most people have at home? It is understandable that even if what they were doing was affordable for more widespread use it wouldn't be used by Joe Schmo, but still 1 - 10mil times faster is a large gap.
Actually, I was at that postdeadline session. I don't have the proceedings handy, but Lucent reported about the same capacity, something like 15 Tbps over 100 or 200 km (and another experiment with a few Tbps over 200 km, if memory serves). The previous record was set by Alcatel in 2002, transmitting 10.2 Tbps over 300 km, and I believe it still stands as the largest capacity*distance. The distance is important; I'm not sure that there haven't already been 100 Tbps transmissions over a few km -- much easier...
I'd like to know what the cost of the required equipment is. We know that hardware has a premium for the newest and fastest and it would be interesting to see what the premium is in this case. Maybe it would be cheaper to run 14 1 Tbps links instead of a single 14 Tbps link. Sure, if I already have the fiber in place, then using it for higher speed would be the way to go. However, if I am in a position where I am about to lay fiber anyway, I don't really care about those costs since I will be paying them anyway.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
While impressive, the feat was accomplished over a single optical fiber using proprietary amplifiers not in production. It certainly is innovative, but it is not an indication of speeds you will see in consumer level services. I see these high-bandwidth paradigms being very useful in the medical industry in the near future - especially for things like transferring high quality MRI images from hospital to hospital with very little delay, or in transferring patient ICU data to a centralized monitoring center - which is currently being done, but super-high bandwidth models open up avenues of information that are not currently available - anything from real-time HI-DEF video from the room, to real-time control of in-room instrumentation.
this statement does not compute *head explodes*
i wonder what kinda of hardware you need to send a burst of 14 TBps? is it comming from that much ram? harddrives? U must have some good hardware to be able to queue up that much data and burst transfer like that.
-EL
Good thing I didn't buy that eSATA card I was looking at today. 3Gb/second? What a piece of crap!
This is the internet, not the interstate.
God spoke to me.
That's actually pretty cool, I don't know if you could multiplex any more with different wavelengths down it at that point, but that smokes my oc3s.
Just to put 14 Tb/s in perspective, 1920 x 1080 x 32 bpp at 30 fps is about 2 Tb/s.
That means you value saving lives over MORE PORN. Everyone seems to have a hidden agenda.
Consider a cargo ship loaded with a thousand cargo containers full of bootleg DVDs. Assume each container cah hold about 200,000 DVDs. Assume it takes a month to steam from Korea to LA or Seattle. That's 9.4GB/DVD x 200,000,000 DVDs / 2,592,000 seconds = 725 GB/sec, or only about 1/20 of the bandwidth of this optical fiber.
:)
This new technology could really be a boon to the bootlegging business!!!
where did they get all those Terabytes to send?
The distance traversed is 100 miles, which would take 1.4 hours, at 70MPH.
There are 3600 seconds in an hour.
This means that per hour a line can move 1.58 million DVD's
for a 70 MPH trip this adjusts to 2.25 Million DVD's
or 225,000 (100 disk spindles) Each Spindle Weighs 4Lbs
leaving 900,000 lbs or 450 tons..
That would be a semi with 200 cars loaded on it....
Now How big of a truck are you drivin....?
Storm
I get a lower ping in Quake? Seriously though, I think half the time it's the servers on the internet that are slow rather than broadband connections. I'm sure this has some real world use, other than publicity, (stock trading) but I can't imagine many companies needed it - except the obvious googles of the world. Backbones are obviously going to be interested but do they shift that volume of data at peak levels?
How many DVD movies per second was this?
Also, they failed to provide a conversion from terabyte to Libraries of Congress.
"140,000 channels of shit on the TV to choose from." Pardons to Fink Ployed. Just think, now you can click through every show ever produced on the planet, in one afternoon - ugh...
Oh well, what the hell...
surely that's swallows ;-)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071853/quotes
spoonerize "magic trackpad"
Try saying "CSRZ-DQPSK" three times fast! I guess this acronym does serve the purpose of being easier to say than "carrier suppressed return-to-zero differential quadrature phase shift keying," but couldn't they have chosen a snazzy acronym that was hip to say and then worked out what it meant, like NASA?
Arthur C. Clarke wrote a short story that had the telephone networks becoming self aware when the network became sufficently complex. It's possible I tell you, the telephone networks just don't have the bandwi....... /eof
......
.....
NOTHING TO SEE HERE. MOVE ALONG.
I abuse commas, I cannot help myself.
One of the russian computer trading companies easily topped that. The box with 20 400GB HDDs fell from the shelf 2m high. Total data transmission rate was
20*4*10^11*8/sqrt(2*2/9.8)~=10^14 bps or 100 Tbps
As you see if you have enough money to burn you may easily scale that number.
my sstream of consciousness
At this point can we start using Bytes instead of bits to measure?
I thought that we had established that the only true way to measure bandwidth was in "Libraries of Congress" expressed as a function of time?
Can't we just stick to the standards?
A reminder for those that haven't been paying attention: data size and bandwith is measured in "Libraries of Congress" Size comparisons for large objects is always done in "Volkswagen Beetles"
Good day.
\/\/oobie
The fastest switch out there is only about 2 terabits/second and most routers are stuck in the hundred gigabit range. How're you going to pool the pipes?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
So while the new line isnt quite nothing compared to a truck, a truck can move more data 100 miles faster than the new link.
Storm
oops. Storm
On the whole, fiber is cheep. Ultra-high-speed multiplexors and demultiplexors are not. A typical bundle of fibers might easily have 128 or 1024 fibers running through it, and the extra quality needed to go from a few terabits to a few tens of terabits won't be significant compared to the cost of running really long fiber in that speed range in the first place.
The ideal, then, is to run a full bundle from each State to every other State. (ie: 49 lines should be sent from each of the 50 States.) At each end, you plug on an agreed-upon switch at an agreed-upon speed. This would start at 2 terabits/second. Each switch is also connected to a large pool of extremely fast routers. Those routers would then have lines to the routers from each of the other 48 multi-terabit State-to-State lines. All remaining connections from the 49 pools of routers would go to the Internet backbone for that State, any metropoliton networks and any State-financed rural networks.
As the switches increase in performance, you only have to replace the switches, not the fiber, since it's stipulated at the beginning that you'd go for the highest-grade fiber available. As soon as 14 terabit switches existed, you'd have an effective bandwidth of 686 terabits. (Since you can do multi-path routing, you can distribute that 686 terabits as you like.)
Wouldn't this be expensive? Sure. However, we've just burned half a trillion dollars for no obvious benefit. Burning another half trillion on providing nuke-resistant, DDoS-proof, meltdown-resistant data infrastructure that would at least serve a provable, verifiable purpose and would eventually reimburse some/all of the costs would seem reasonable enough.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Current routers, like the Cisco CRS-1, use OC-768c/STM-256, which is about 40 Gbit/sec. Right now, there are a couple of camps in the IEEE, ones that want 40 Gbit Ethernet, others that want the factor of 10 increase that Ethernet has normally been associated with. Since there is no 100 Gbit SONET (that I'm aware of at least), these public demonstrations, this one by NTT and another by Lucent, prove that 100 Gbit Ethernet is possible, even for long haul. Some providers like at&t, Yahoo and Google, really need 100 Gbit Ethernet because they produce that much data, or provide 10 Gbit service to customers, and they need to aggregate it somehow.
I once threw a box of 120 Gig tapes into a dumpster. I think there were about 200 tapes in the box.
I admit the distance wasn't far, but the burst rate was 24 TBytes/sec.
I could download the latest Gangasta Ho'z Up tHa Butt No. 17... Sweet!
The glass is half-full. With poison. And there are cracks in the glass. The dirty, dirty glass.
Someday our kids will look back at us and wonder how the hell we surfed porn so slow.
...that you should never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon loaded with tapes?! And that was in the 70's or 80's, I think.
Imagine today, filling up a semi with double-layer DVDs, with all the data on them compressed using modern compression schemes?! If the semi can go 60 mph, and the internal dimensions of its trailer are 41' by 8' by 9' (meaning you can fit 23 exabytes on the truck, assuming the data on a DVD are compressed with a 1.75 mean compression factor), your data is moving at a speed of 25080.60713 exabyte-inches per second. This is pretty fast. Of course, the detailed computations made to come up with this figure do not take into consideration the time it would take you to purchase the above DVDs, compress and burn the data to all of them, and then load the above truck with them. If this is one of those "how long is eternity" problems (like the one in Bless Me Ultima where a bird has to transport a mountain from one side of the world to the other, holding only one granule of sand in its beak at a time, with a round trip time of 12 weeks... and when it finishes, that's only the first day of eternity) and you have to walk to the store to buy the DVDs, and you're only allowed to buy one at a time.... then you'll realize that you're better off ordering DSL.
Fortunately the mind-state of an MPAA lawyer is extremely simple and is most typically represented by a binary flag, aka "evil bit," at the start of the video stream. Encoding is accomplished for each subsequent frame by XORing its bits with the evil bit.
How do they keep 1 Tbps saturated? Do they keep it all in memory? Keep repeating the same message? I doubt they are using disk drives to keep that up.
Will the War in Iraq get better or worse in 2007? Vote here
Actually, thats assuming a boeing can turn on the spot. But it can't.
my capcha was condom
a truck can move more data 100 miles faster than the new link
Until you consider loading/unloading time and writing/reading the DVDs, which would add days of latency. I'm assuming that this fiber line has vritually no latency.
I don't care, if I get shot in a game of CS, I'm still blaming it on the lag.
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
It's not the weight. It's the volume.
Let's see. 2.25 million DVDs... That's 22,500 hundred disk cake box spindles, which come in cartons of six (thus taking 3750 cartons) each of which is 44.5 x 30 x 19cm making 95.11875 cubic metres. A standard trailer cargo container is 76 cubic metres, thus it would take 2 cargo containers. You would need a double trailer train.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
...you can watch it much faster!!!
The view was horrible and the smell was even worse; Julie severely regretted becoming a proctologist.
http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2004/prod_070104.ht ml
--- RFC 1149 Compliant.
It has the same problem as the semi, more or less, it is only going to be as useful as the users ability to read from and write to disk; 14Tbps is quite a bit of data to deal with.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
...in Romania(Arad - Ineu, countryside) I`m browsing this story at the amazing speed of 5Kb/s. Why? Because God hates me, that's why, he has made my life miserable.
If only those poor people in Atlantis had this technology before they found a ZPM.
Shane
Possibilities are : 14Tbps of Hello World, foobar and Lorem Ipsum ? 14Tbps of pr0n Vista rc2
This is not an automated signature. I type this in to the bottom of every message.
Now of course, greater bandwidth is cool and all, but 14 Tbps is obviously impractical for actual use, even in specialist medical imaging applications -- for the simple reason you couldn't fill up your harddrive (or even RAM) as quick as that!
Sure, you'll have trouble finding a single application to handle that data rate. But say that I'm a broadcaster now paying to have my 100 SDI video paths (each 270 Mbps) carried across town on dozens of fibers because each fiber can only carry a handful of them. Each time there's a leap in bandwidth like this, I'll be able to pile more SDIs (or -gasp- HD-SDIs at 1.5 Gbps each!) on each fiber and either A) save money by canceling my lease on some of the fibers, or B) be able to dream up new things to do with the fiber capacity freed up.
Note to self: ask telco why I can't run 10 Tbps on each of my fibers :)
One simple rule for its versus it's
...takes 15 freaking seconds to list the contents of a folder.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
The advantage of this new tech is that current fiber thats in the ground can be used.
While impressive, the feat was accomplished over a single optical fiber using proprietary amplifiers not in production. It certainly is innovative, but it is not an indication of speeds you will see in consumer level services.
What would a consumer do with 10 terabits per second? The only comprehensible measure of that speed is "one large cabinet of DVDs per second." It might be nice to have a DVD vending machine that could chug along at that clip, but you'd have to feed it a ton of polycarbonate every 5 minutes or so, or, put another way, two boxcars of DVD blanks (cases and pallets not included) per day. Then, what do you put on them? After all, it takes only 3 months to crank out the roughly 1.5 billion DVDs that will be sold this year. The remaining 4.5 billion are, what, extra copies of Battlefield Earth and Gigli?
I guess you're right that it's not "consumer level." Good call.
I remember working on this wacky thing called "twisted pair Ethernet" with this exotic technology called "echo cancellation." Frankly that flimsy stuff has never had the cachet of half-inch thick yellow coax. Plus, you can't tell when someone down the hall has unplugged the cable from his transceiver.
Is it possible to have that bus speed on a motherboard? modern CPUs are not fed data fast enough from memory, one of the reasons being the bus being so slow.
http://www.google.nl/search?q=20*400GB/sqrt(2m*2/( 9.8m/s/s))in+Tbps
This is why you should flood wire fibre to the desktop in any building you're planning to stay for more than a decade. Then you just upgrade the switches and cards, no need to rewire every 3 years.
Deleted
This is backbone technology. It is used to carry lots of users' data simultaneously over a single fiber. What this means is that telecoms will be able to support more users with fewer fibers. The speed of end-users' hard drives is mostly irrelevant.
you certainly know how to trash a system!
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
just tie the input to the output and say all data recieved 2x, eventually you end up with a perpetual data machine.
That's one helluva telegraph line.
Sure, unless you are comparing it to the bandwidth of a semi full of dvds.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
You could beat this easily with a dump-truck full of floppy disks... ok maybe DVDs...