Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Planning New Undersea Cable Across Pacific?

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the stranger-things-have-been-sponsored dept.

tregetour writes "Google is planning a multi-terabit undersea communications cable across the Pacific Ocean for launch in 2009, Communications Day reports: 'Google would not strictly confirm or deny the existence of the Unity plan today, with spokesman Barry Schnitt telling our North American correspondent Patrick Neighly that "Additional infrastructure for the Internet is good for users and there are a number of proposals to add a Pacific submarine cable. We're not commenting on any of these plans." However, Communications Day understands that Unity would see Google join with other carriers to build a new multi-terabit cable. Google would get access to a fibre pair at build cost handing it a tremendous cost advantage over rivals such as MSN and Yahoo, and also potentially enabling it to peer with Asia ISPs behind their international gateways — considerably improving the affordability of Internet services across Asia Pacific.'"

17 of 144 comments (clear)

  1. evesdropping requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So will the NSA tap it at the google datacenter with their permission ala AT&T or will the Navy have to tap it will one of those fancy subs we keep hearing about that lifts the cable off the seabed and can splice without interruption?

    Because you know there's no way "homeland security" is letting that happen without monitoring.

    You know with these kinds of resources, if Google ever did turn evil, we'd never figure it out until it was far too late...

    1. Re:evesdropping requirements by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 4, Informative

      ...can splice without interruption...
      For copper, sure, but not with fiber optics.
      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:evesdropping requirements by AHuxley · · Score: 4, Informative
      Its already set up via the NSA's Kunia Regional Security Operations Center in Hawaii.
      NZ, Australia, Japan and now something extra in Hawaii. Asia is now so tapped.
      Google is of no interest, the NSA can tap at any point they want.

      http://cryptome.org/google/kunia-us.htm

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:evesdropping requirements by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Considering that the US Navy in conjunction with the CIA was tapping Soviet copper phone cables as far back as the 1970's I wouldn't find it all that unlikely that they now have the technology to tap fiber cables. Yes, I know that splicing into fiber is extremely difficult in the best of situations, but if braniacs could figure out how to locate and tap underwater copper cables almost 30-40 years ago then I wouldn't hold it against modern-day braniacs to figure out a way to tap fiber cables in this day and age.

    4. Re:evesdropping requirements by smallfries · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Splicing is not actually necessary. No cable has perfect internal reflection and so some light escapes naturally. A tap can sample this light without disrupting the cable, or being detectable. There was also a method a few years ago that involved encasing the cable in something that reduces the refractive index of the glass at the boundary and so allows the signal to be read - but this can be detected by the network operator. Newer methods are undetectable.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
  2. What about the cost of US internet? by ejito · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why are we trying to reduce the cost of Asian providers when the US' is still overpriced, unreliable, and underserved?

    Last time I checked, Japan and SK had amazing speeds (10-100mbit) for very affordable prices. It's still a matter of government intervention, not corporate meddling.

    1. Re:What about the cost of US internet? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This situation will never, ever happen in the U.S., even if politicians try to wave magic Government-Issued wands.

      Yes and no.

      The Feds, over the past decade, did wave such a magic card at the Telcos and the billions of dollars that were inside that card that were supposed to be used for such a buildout just vanished. Gone. Never to be seen again. "Information superhighway" my ass.

      So the situation could obtain in the U.S. but only if we remove a major stumbling block: the major ISP themselves. Believe me, the investment capital would be available if the people willing to put up the money knew that they would receive a return on that investment. Interestingly, Google is investing heavily in infrastructure, but they're not giving it to the incumbents. They know better than anyone that it would be a waste of money.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:What about the cost of US internet? by haulbag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Although it is really entertaining to read all of these conspiracy theories, they really have no basis in fact or common telecom practice. I have been in the telecom business for 15 years, and this is just one of many such deals that happen every few years. For example, check out Global Crossing's international crossings on their network map.

      This deal has nothing to do with making Internet access cheaper for anyone. What it is about is the ability to capture significant revenue by owning the transmission pipe. It is often the case that a consortium of telecom companies go in together on the cost of a new telecom crossing. Based on how much they pay, they purchase a certain number of fiber pairs.

      The whole idea is that by owning the physical facilities, you can put optics on the end that enable you to have almost unlimited bandwidth. You can open as many wavelengths (a.k.a windows) as you have the technology for, and sell those wavelengths, or portions of them, to other carriers for a much higher price than your base cost. Most of these wavelengths are sold based on an IRU agreement (Irrefutable Right of Use) to other carriers for a specific number of years.

      In Google's case, I would say that their motivation would be to enable cost savings. If you own the fiber pairs, you don't have to pay way more to buy a wavelength IRU or a private line. This does not really appreciably increase the amount of bandwidth available to the world, because there is really an over-abundance of capacity as it is.

      Another strategic reason to invest in the fiber would be to bypass the PTT (Post Telegraph and Telephone) monopoly in that country. That enables you to connect directly to a competitive carrier in the foreign country and reduce your cost per minute for terminating phone calls to the PSTN in that country. Without bypassing the PTT, you are stuck with the ITU negotiated settlement rates, which are much higher in cost. So Google could use some of the windows on this fiber to send voice traffic cheaper. If you are expecting billions of minutes, this makes sense as a cost savings.

      This really has nothing to do with direct bandwidth available to Asian customers, but it could help reduce latency for ISPs in Asian countries if they interconnect with Google directly to pass packets destined to Google. That would cut out several router hops and would therefore speed transmission.

      If Google wants to, they could also provide IP transport to ISPs who want to connect to US-based Net sites. If they really want to act like a carrier, that's a no-brainer. Most likely there will be a significant portion of the traffic that is headed in one way or the other (probably toward the US), so Google could at least sell the extra capacity going the other direction.

  3. Sounds good by The+Famous+Brett+Wat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As I understand it, Australia (and probably everyone else, for that matter) has been getting reamed by the USA as regards Internet peering arrangements. Bandwidth costs have always been higher here, and it's not all to do with a lack of local competition, although that used to be a credible story back when Telstra was charging twenty cents a megabyte for permanent dial-up connectivity. These days the economic pressure is mostly conspicuous for the fact that local hosting services are so expensive. If Google busts up that cosy little oligopoly, I'll love them to bits for it. To gigabits, even. (Sorry. Preemptive pun. Someone had to do it.)

    Is this a part of Google's answer to the whole carrier sabre-rattling about non-neutrality and wanting a slice of Google's profits? There's no better way to ensure fair treatment than to provide your own infrastructure. Is this Google's way of saying to the carriers, "get over it, guys -- bandwidth is a fricken commodity now, and we're going to compete with you to make it so, so kiss your old monopoly profits goodbye." There's a high barrier to entry in this market, and you'd be mad to buy your way in only to compete all the profits out of it -- unless you happen to be a major consumer of bandwidth yourself, like Google.

    Must... not... get... hopes... up...

    --
    proof, n. A demonstration that a conclusion is implied by certain premises and axioms.
  4. Re:Do no evil .... by ChronosWS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I assure you the Chinese government doesn't suddenly have less authority because Google has fiber in the Pacific.

  5. Africa by pilsner.urquell · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What about Africa? This is a continent that needs Internet access more than any other and a new undersea cable is embroiled in bitter political animosity IMHO Google could generate a lot of good will for itself focusing in the area that needs the most attention.

    1. Re:Africa by LineGrunt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why not Africa?

      Because businesses function on making money, not just fulfilling "needs."

      Undersea cables are hideously expensive and the company putting one in _needs_ to have a reasonable chance of recouping those costs.

      While Africa may "need" internet, the fact that companies aren't already in a race to provide Africa with internet is a de-facto signal that multiple companies don't think they have a business case to provide it.

      I need a "Ferrari" but the business community isn't in a hurry to provide ME with one either.

  6. Re:Great? by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Me? I would go up through Alaska, through Russia via the Bering Sea. Cap'n Sig would do most of the work for me on the Northwestern. I would avoid doing a Portland-to-Tokyo route because of the ring-o-fire thingy.

    It's amusing that you would mention that, because the first transatlantic telegraph cable (well... the first project - there were a few abortive attempts as well as some attempts that stopped working soon after completion) was in direct competition with a "do it the long way" overland route via Russia that was being built by Western Union. The first long-lasting undersea cable eventually finished the race first in 1866, and the Western Union attempt was abandoned the next year.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_telegraph_cable
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Union_Telegraph_Expedition

  7. They are buying one fiber pair by mbone · · Score: 5, Informative

    Don't get the vapors, everyone. Google is buying one fiber pair. This will lower their costs, but only that. There will be, what, 200+ fiber pairs in that cable. There will be some to go around if anyone else wants to pony up.

    As for "considerably improving the affordability of Internet services across Asia Pacific,'" I don't follow that at all. Google doesn't sell transit. The new cable might do that, but not because of Google - because real ISPs will get other fiber pairs and use them to sell transit.

    Next, we'll get articles about how Google's corporate jets will revolutionize air transport in North America ! (At least, for Google execs.)

  8. Wikipedia article - Submarine Communications Cable by fejikso · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was prompted me to look at the wikipedia and found this interesting article:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_communications_cable

    I particularly found very interesting the map with all the undersea cables in the world. Pretty cool.

  9. Google an NSA front ... by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 3, Funny

    You are assuming that google is not an NSA front. Think about it, they monitor and record your web browsing habits, your travel plans, they scan your email, they want you to use their online word processor, ... That wanting to know everything about you and your behaviors and interests for the purpose of directed commercial advertising is a beautiful front. ;-)

  10. Neal Stephenson article on cable laying by Rick+Bentley · · Score: 3, Informative

    Neal Stephenson did an article for Wired on the laying of global fiber optic cable about a decade ago. It's a long read but a good one (kind of like Snow Crash was). He travels around the world following the laying of FLAG (Fiber Link Around the Globe). He covers everything from laying the cable, to the landing points, to over-land connections, to telco monopolies, to everything else. If you're a geek and into submarine cable laying, then the article below is almost required reading. http://econ161.berkeley.edu/OpEd/virtual/stephenson.html

    --
    My favorite quote doesn't fit into 120 characters. Now no one will like me.