Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Break Internet Speed Records

Posted by Zonk on from the hey-you-yeah-you-using-firefox-pull-over dept.

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."

23 of 140 comments (clear)

  1. Why is the theoretical limit 10 Gbps? by msauve · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Don't they have redundant paths? Can't they use ECMP? (I'm assuming that the "limit" is referring to 10 Gbps max link speed)

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. 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.

  2. 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 presarioD · · Score: 5, Interesting

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

      Hmmm, let's see: Let's have maximum capacity DVD's at 9GB and for the sake of this exercise let's say the station wagon's capacity is 1000 DVDs so we have 9000GB moving around. Let's say the 20,000 mile distance will be covered at top speed (breaking speed limits in all states) at 100miles/h that results in 200 hours of deliverance time so:

      station wagon data speed = 9000 GB / 200 hours = 45 GB / hour = 0.0125 GB / sec = 0.1 Gbit / sec

      Nope the Japanese win!

      --
      Yam, yam, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade
    2. 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
    3. Re:But... by SETIGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hmmm, let's see: Let's have maximum capacity DVD's at 9GB and for the sake of this exercise let's say the station wagon's capacity is 1000 DVDs so we have 9000GB moving around. Let's say the 20,000 mile distance will be covered at top speed (breaking speed limits in all states) at 100miles/h that results in 200 hours of deliverance time so:

      station wagon data speed = 9000 GB / 200 hours = 45 GB / hour = 0.0125 GB / sec = 0.1 Gbit / sec

      You are mixing up latency with bandwidth. The latency (round trip time) of the connection here is 400 hours. The bandwidth (i.e. data rate) is the amount of data divided by the time it takes for the data to travel its own length.

      At 100 mph, a station wagon will travel its length in 0.14 seconds. So the bandwidth of a stationwagon packed with 9000 GB of data is about 550 Tbps.

      Given a train of station wagons running at 100mph, you could sustain that. Of course with 1440000000 ms ping times, I wouldn't try playing Battlefield 2 over that connection.

      Seriously, the distinction is important. If you included transit time when calculating bandwidth, the theoretical maximum bandwidth for a 12,000 bit packet on a 20,000 mile path would be 112 kbps.

      --
      Support SETI@home
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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?
  6. We need a real alternative to the internet. by zymano · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A backbone not owned by the phone companies would reduce prices. An alternative that that doesn't rely on the robberbaron phone and cable companies for the last mile(wimax?).

    Something that allows for video like Iptv would be big.

    It would be more disruptive than the current net because then you could attend classes from home.

    This would be great for the economy too.

  7. 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
  8. Gee I'm impressed... by spydum · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'd be more impressed if they DIDN'T modify the TCP stack, and used the PUBLIC Internet. Internet2 is far from a real production network. 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.

    1. 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.
  9. 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.

    --
    Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
  10. 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
  11. 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 Nullav · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think I'd get bored waiting around...

      You look at a progress bar for entertainment?
      On a more serious note, you'd still get in one chunk, so the initial byte wouldn't matter.

      What we need to look at is Gigabits per dollar.
      Assuming that you were somehow blessed with an ISP that would let you download over a TB/month, and had a 5Mb/s connection (and assuming constant speed), it would take roughly 19.4 days to download.
      Assuming a 30-day month and that your ISP charged $40/month, it would come to $25.86 for that one transfer, which would be $0.000003/Mb.
      Shipping a 700g package to (anywhere in) Canada via USPS airmail (The Internet is international, after all.) would be $14.50. That comes to $0.000001/MB.

      Just my 0.0002 cents.
      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
  12. Airbus wins by benhocking · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But the calculations do need correction. :) 210,000 TB in 40 hours = 1,458 GB/s or 1.458 TB/s.

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
  13. Re:New Speed Record? by tomstdenis · · Score: 4, Informative

    As I understand it, this is over one link. OC-192 is actually a series of OC-48 links bonded together.

    Heck you can get yourself a nice 10gbit/sec line with 10 1gbit lines, ooh la lah

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  14. size of a byte, and storage capacity of the net by rmelton · · Score: 3, Interesting

    With simple assumptions and google calculator

    c / 9.08e9 bits per second =
        the speed of light / (9.08e9 (bits per second)) = 0.264134324 m / Byte

    20000 miles / (c / 9.08e9 bits per second) =
      (20 000 miles) / (c / (9.08e9 (bits per second))) = 116.212843 megabytes

    So bytes are 26 centimeters long, and the network holds 116MB in transit.