Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Break Internet Speed Records

MosiMosi wrote to let us know about a new development on the Internet2 front. Researchers in Tokyo have advanced the speed of the network, breaking records twice in two days back in December of last year. "On Dec. 30 [researchers] sent data at 7.67 gigabits per second, using standard communications protocols. The next day, using modified protocols, the team broke the record again by sending data over the same 20,000-mile path at 9.08 Gbps. That likely represents the current network's final record because rules require a 10 percent improvement for recognition, a percentage that would bring the next record right at the Internet2's current theoretical limit of 10 Gbps."

22 of 140 comments (clear)

  1. But... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Funny

    But can they beat a station wagon full of backup tapes (or DVDs or whatever) yet?

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    1. Re:But... by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 2, Funny

      Clearly, they must have used very sturdy tubes for this project. Therefore, you could take those same tubes and create tunnels to cross the oceans, which would allow a station wagon full of DVDs to drive around the world. Therefore, it will *always* be impossible to beat the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes or DVDs, because the station wagon will just rise with the tide.

    2. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yeah, but the station wagon has MUCH higher latency (or is Comcast that bad?)

    3. Re:But... by maynard · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's just the fake wood paneling causing too much air friction. Rip that stuff out and you'll get 0.10000100 Gbps, no prob.

    4. Re:But... by Obyron · · Score: 5, Funny

      Au contraire!

      Your capacity estimate is way, way too low. My DVD test samples can get 15 discs in a space 1"x5"x5" (e.g., 25in^3). There are 1728in^3 in a cubic foot, which translates to about 69 such stacks, for a total of 1035 discs per cubic foot. With its rear seat folded down the 2008 Volkswagen Jetta SportsWagen has 66.9ft^3 of storage space (source). We'll call it 67ft^3 for the sake of the math, and assume that you've crammed a few discs in the glovebox. This brings us to a total of 69,345 discs in our datawagon. If we use dual layer blu-ray discs at 50gb/disc that comes to 3.07 petabytes (x10^15). I'll use your 200 hour delivery time, which means we have an overall speed of 269.09GB/s (3467250000000000 bytes / 12000 seconds). You can keep your internet2, although I -will- cede that it gets better gas mileage.

      I would like to posit a new theorum: Advances in storage space and vehicle capacity will always increase such that a sufficiently well-fueled station wagon will have faster throughput than the latest advances in network architecture.

      --
      --Obyron
  2. and so when your staff sends you an e-Mail... by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 5, Funny

    So with this newer, faster internet, when your staff sends you an e-Mail at 10 AM Friday, you don't have to wait over the weekend to get it?

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
    1. Re:and so when your staff sends you an e-Mail... by 0racle · · Score: 3, Funny

      Depends on if it gets to take the first class or economy class tubes.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    2. Re:and so when your staff sends you an e-Mail... by zCyl · · Score: 4, Funny

      when your staff sends you an e-Mail at 10 AM Friday

      Your staff doesn't send email. They send internets.
  3. Improvement by pizzach · · Score: 3, Funny

    On Dec. 30 [researchers] sent data at 7.67 gigabits per second, using standard communications protocols Yes, the internet seems to be getting faster bit by bit.

    Ha ha ha *snort* I beat myself up.
    --
    Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
  4. tubes? by TinBromide · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maybe if they moved from a series of tubes to parallel tubes, they'd get a higher current flow...

    --
    Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
  5. Obligatory Simpsons quote by smooth+wombat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Marge: "Does anyone need that much porn?"

    Homer (drooling): "One million times faster...."

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  6. Re:Why is the theoretical limit 10 Gbps? by Anon-Admin · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am sorry, the budget was cut and we had to eliminate the redundant paths. It was too costly and as such we expect you figure out how to get the full 10Gbps out of the single T1 line. Please have the proposal ready by tomorrow, and remember that any solution you come up with should cost no more than your time. Oh, and we are a Windows only shop so you can not suggest OSS solutions.

    Thank you,
        Your Management.

  7. This just in.. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

    Internet2 has just gone even faster, breaking the speed of light.

    An email has just been sent to a researcher on ARPANET in 1972, who unfortunately doesn't know what "v1@gr@" is or why he would want to "enlarge pens" with it.

  8. High quality movies! by smitty97 · · Score: 5, Funny
    from TFA:

    With the 10-fold increase, a high-quality version of the movie "The Matrix" could be sent in a few seconds rather than half a minute...
    Efforts to make a high quality version of "The Matrix Revolutions" have not succeeded in any time frame.
    --
    mod me funny
  9. Never underestimate... by Daath · · Score: 5, Funny

    *Never* underestimate an Airbus A380-800F. It will carry a 150 tonne payload at 0.85 mach, 6500 miles before refueling. A Hitachi 7K1000 1TB drive weighs in at 700 g. That's around 210,000 TB. Flight at .85 mach will take about 30 hours, let's give them 10 hours for refuelling and maintenance. That's 40 hours. If I'm not mistaken, that's around 60 GB per second. What's that? Around half a TBps?

    Beat THAT Internet2!

    Feel free to correct my "calculations", as they weren't any such thing! :)

    --
    Any technology distinguishable from magic, is insufficiently advanced.
    1. Re:Never underestimate... by woodhouse · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not bad, but I'm not sure I'd want to play CS with that kind of ping.

    2. Re:Never underestimate... by TimToady · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's nothin'. Never underestimate the bandwidth of an Airbus full of station wagons...

  10. Assume 60 mph by benhocking · · Score: 2, Funny

    If we assume 60mph average speed for that trip, than a 20,000 mile trip will take 333 hours and 20 minutes or 1,200,000. At 9 GB/s, the network will have transferred 10,800 TB in that amount of time. Assuming dual-layer blu-ray DVDs, each with 50 GB (0.05 TB) of data, the station wagon will have to carry more than 216,000 DVDs for it to win. If each DVD takes up about 3.6 cubic inches (0.1x6x6) or 0.002 cubic feet, the station wagon will need to carry 432 cubic feet of DVDs.

    I think the network wins this one.

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
    1. Re:Assume 60 mph by fireylord · · Score: 1, Funny

      ugh, imperial measurements. _so_ undigital.

  11. Re:Gee I'm impressed... by powerpants · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm sure if I ran 40,000 miles of fiber and interconnected two idle routers and modified my TCP stack to handle massive window sizes and other tweaks, I could get nearly the full line rate, at twice the distance. And if you had, we'd be talking about it.
  12. Re:Airbus wins by Hossicle · · Score: 2, Funny

    During a recent attempt I got at least a transfer rate 2.1 TB/s through a common phone line.

    Unfortunately the data was just a big string of Zeros...

    Does that count? Great compression rate too!

  13. Re:Confusing bandwidth with latency... by alienmole · · Score: 2, Funny

    The bandwidth is the amount of time it takes the data to travel its own length.
    Wow, that makes it all so simple, thanks! Now I just have to measure how long this file I have is. I guess I have to print it out and use a ruler, but what font size should I use? This network design stuff is tricky!