Internet2 and You

eldavojohn writes "With a name like Internet2 and such high press coverage, you might think that's the future of the Internet servicing our homes. But Ars Technica looks more closely at what the odds actually are for it to become mainstream. When will you see the effects of the software, planning and hardware that went into Internet2 in your home? The odds are the very distant future — if at all. From the article: 'The Internet as we now know it is anything but obsolete. The amount of dedicated hardware and personal attention required to get networks like Internet2 and DANTE working simply makes them uneconomical for most common uses. And, unless a majority of networked content moves onto these dedicated networks, then having access to them may not do users much good. If the academic networks change the commercial ones, they'll do it in an evolutionary way, by providing improved hardware and better software for running traffic within the constraints of the existing economic structure.'"

Comments

Great plot for..

[somersault]

With a name like Internet2 and such high press coverage, you might think that's the future of the internet servicing our homes House: Oh hello, thanks for getting here so quickly!
Internet2: I hear you've been having some problems with your tubes, can you direct me to the back door?

Re:Great plot for..

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't the same conversation occur in the movie Brazil? Pipes, not tubes... but what's the difference?

Re:Great plot for..

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you fill out your 27B-6 before attempting to reply?

Remember when the Internet was like that.

[Chrisq]

The amount of dedicated hardware and personal attention required to get networks like Internet2 and DANTE working simply makes them uneconomical for most common uses.

Before the world wide web, when the internet was mainly news groups, uucp and email (with pling addresses, because there was no dns for routing. I used to think how great it would be if ordinary people could afford to connect, not just academic institutions and large technology companies. The cost ad difficulty of configuration was prohibitive.

This is where internet2 is currently. It doesn't mean it will be in a couple of decades.

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[dreamchaser]

While you make a good analogy and your conclusion is possible, I think it's more likely that the current Internet will just continue to increase in bandwidth and services to end users. I would not be surprised to see Internet2 one day be either still stuck as an academic only network, or just dissapear altogether.

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[El Torico]

I would not be surprised to see Internet2 one day be either still stuck as an academic only network,...

Well, that wouldn't be a bad thing though. Internet2 would be used for research and other serious work and the Internet would be used for games, porn, inane myspace pages, and (of course) our favorite message board.

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[mrsteveman1]

you mean you guys still like to browse the teletubby forums too??!?!

oh man i thought i was all alone

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[blankinthefill]

I've said it before and will say it again: I don't think that the common person will ever have access to I2. It was designed and built to provided high quality, high bandwidth connections for research purposes. Any piggy backing by other applications and uses is incidental, and if it were to interfere with the academic work that I2 is used for, I'm reasonably sure it would be stopped. Now, I'm not saying that everything that makes I2 so great WON'T come to the general consumer... but it won't come in the form of I2. The academics will never give up the highly regulated, and quite frankly, incredibly important tool that they have in I2, nor should they.

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[spectre_240sx]

The difference is that Internet2 has competition in place where the original Internet didn't.

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[Anonymous Coward]

So Internet2 would be "Serious Business", whilst Internet1 would be SRSBZNS?

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[Guy Harris]

Before the world wide web, when the internet was mainly news groups, uucp and email (with pling addresses, because there was no dns for routing.

According to RFC 921, the host table was to be decommissioned in September 1984, although it notes that hadn't been done yet. I don't think they were off by much, however, so that was a long time before the WWW.

Or perhaps by "the internet" you meant the Matrix (Quarterman coined the term long before the movie...)? At that point, the ARPANET and Internet were mainly for academic institutions and large technology companies; most other organizations and individuals had UUCP connections for e-mail and netnews. In the late 1980's Internet connections started being offered to a wider set of users, but I think there was still a period between that point and the point at which consumer ISPs started appearing.

This is where internet2 is currently. It doesn't mean it will be in a couple of decades.

Or perhaps not, if, instead, Internet2 remains as a dedicated network and the technologies developed for it filter down to the mainstream Internet.

Re:Remember when the Internet was like that.

[jopsen]

I think the big difference is that today we already have a network infrastructure... To built a new one when one is already in place is just waste of time and money... Just look at how long time it takes to move to IPv6, yes I know there's a lot of other issues regarding that...

Which is exactly the point of Internet2

[csoto]

I don't get the point of the article, except to point out this is exactly why Internet2 was created. It's a combination of a research vehicle for advanced internetworking, as well as a "series of tubes" to skip traffic around "commodity IP services" for the participants.

The "Internet" isn't your "broadband" provider. It's the interconnects between networks. Just like the interstates and all the developments in building/maintaining those have very little to do with the street and driveway you use daily, Internet2 has very little to do with the IP connection to your home.

Re:Which is exactly the point of Internet2

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a bit like saying the phone network has very little to do with your home phone line. It makes sense from a very limited perspective, IF you choose to limit your perspective in that way, but using standard definitions of the words, and an overall perspective, then... no, phones are very much a part of the phone network -- in fact, they're the point of the phone network.

Re:Which is exactly the point of Internet2

[Anonymous Coward]

Internet is to Porn as Internet2 is to HD Porn.

Re:Which is exactly the point of Internet2

[Schadrach]

I don't know, I travel 50 miles of interstate each way to get to and from work,leaving home at 5AM and getting back at ~5:30 PM.

Re:Which is exactly the point of Internet2

[DigiAngel]

From what I understand, Internet2 is mainly academic. According to my professors (many of whom are working on it)say right now the focus is academic usage.

Re:Which is exactly the point of Internet2

[LostCluster]

Internet2 is poorly named. It's not meant to be the replacement to the consumer's .com Internet, it's meant to be the replacement for .edu and .gov's Internet that got ruined by .com.

In the bad old days of Napster, Internet2 used to be the primary venue of illegal file sharing because they connected college dorm to college dorm. Now, not so much. It's for researcher to researcher connections in the university offices.

I'm completely unshocked

[samael]

They may well build links between the internet and internet2, and ideas ill undoubtedly osmose across, but did people really expect internet2 to be rolled out to replace the internet? And if so, how did they expect it to happen?

Re:I'm completely unshocked

[mckinnsb]

I'm guessing that there are only a few groups of people that actually expected Internet2 to replace the internet:
1) The people that work at Internet2.
2) The press covering Internet2.
3) People who read tech news but don't know much about the internet. This group can bleed into 2) and 1) above.

This is really a de-evolution of the internet, and is very similar to how the internet used to operate before a lot of convenient protocols were set up. The only difference here is back in the day, Ye Old Internets were being channeled through very thin pipes, and Ye New Internets2 uses unused portions(dark fiber) of already-existing fiber-optic cable. These portions of cable are intended to be used by service provider companies later, as it becomes more profitable and meets their business model.

What should be interesting to computer scientists/IT people , however, aren't the raw numbers or hardware involved. All of Internet2's infrastructure uses pre-existing hardware and network capacity. What should be interesting are the results of some of their "risky" network algorithm setups - removing, for instance, acknowledgments (ACK packets) from each individual sent packet. I'd be interested to see the results of assuming a solid network connection with gigabytes of data in a closed environment. Will there be data corruption, or can a computer network be controlled sufficiently enough on a global level to remove the need for ACK?

Re:I'm completely unshocked

[pyite]

What should be interesting are the results of some of their "risky" network algorithm setups - removing, for instance, acknowledgments (ACK packets) from each individual sent packet.

Well this is easy, and it can be done on the existing Internet. Use UDP.

Internet2 was never supposed to replace "The Internet." It's best thought of as a collection of private peering and transit agreements between research institutions.

Re:I'm completely unshocked

[Deliveranc3]

I expected them to use current technology for their infrastructure unlike internet1.

Eventually someone would say something like "look at all these shmoes with their crappy 3/15Mb connections..." and plug Internet1 in because the bandwidth it can use is so pathetically small.

Kind of like I share my wireless with people at dialup+ speeds, I can support several hundred of them... dozens at a time with negligible performance hits.

Well that's how it would work if the rest of the internet had the shameful infrastructure it does in North America.

Waiting for Internet3

[WheresMyDingo]

I've heard the odd internets are better. Only one sample so far though.

Re:Waiting for Internet3

[robertjw]

Just be grateful that Microsoft wasn't put in charge of creating the Internet, or we'd all still be using station wagons full of tapes* in 2020, while waiting for Internet 3.1**. * And you think global warming is bad in our reality... ** aka Internet for Workgroups

And eventually we would get Internet Vista and Applie would come out with Internet X.

Re:Waiting for Internet3

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the odd numbered are development versions! You should only be using the odd numbered internets if you are a developer.

Everyone knows that.

Re:Waiting for Internet3

[Mister Whirly]

Same as the Star Trek movies rule - only the even ones are good.

Re:Waiting for Internet3

[gstoddart]

I've heard the odd internets are better. Only one sample so far though.

Well, so far, this one is plenty odd. :-P

Cheers

Internet for academic use

[explosivejared]

That's something I can behind. I've participated in the LHC@Home program, and I at least feel that this sort of thing is in keeping with the general spirit of the Internet. I just have this fear that the whole thing is going to be decimated by the entertainment industry with video on demand and the like. I prefer we keep the cable infrastructure in tact for video delivery. I think the Internet is much more useful in its current state.

Who paid for it?

[rs79]

Keep in mind if you bought a domain name in the past 10 years you paid for this.

Back when domains were $100 for two years, 30% went into an "intellectual infrastructure fund". This was set up by Don Mitchell of the National Science Foundation who has aegis over domains and administered the NSI contract.

Don felt the internet did well because of the IETF process (not the IETF per se) and created this fund to keep that "pure". Ie it wouldn't need corporate sponsors. He though the money wouold be used for workshops, research grants what have you.

When ICANN reared it's ugly head Mike Roberts convinced congress to give him the money to build internet2 in the US. Never mind that people all over the world paid into that fund.

It's an overpriced testbed that has absolutely nothing to do with reality or what the next version of the Internet will be.

Oblig.

[sootman]

I'll skip Internet2. I'm waiting for Internet3.11 for Workgroups.

Re:Oblig.

[Daimanta]

My Internet goes all the way up to 11!

Re:Oblig.

[cashman73]

I'm holding out for Internet42, which will contain the answer to life, the universe, and everything.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Forget that, I'm waiting for 4chan's release of Intarwebs Anonymous Edition.

Re:Oblig.

[Hillgiant]

Too much DRM. I'll keep my Internet2sp3 till you pry it out of my cold dead ethernet port.

Re:Oblig.

[dominious]

I had no idea the Internet released Internet2. I'm going to download it right now! where's the torrent?

Internet

[ztcamper]

There can be no such thing as internet2. Net is a concept. Protocols can be revised but there can be no net2. It's just net, like gravity. May be Montana has something to add?

Some care to explain

[Bombula]

Would someone like to explain, for the benefit of us still in the dark, why internet 2 can't just be connected to the rest of the internet? I mean, if I have a machine whose hardware and software enable it to accept incoming connections and push data in and out super fast, why does it matter who connects to it? If someone who old gear connects, they're going to run at the limits of their gear. If someone with new gear like mine connects, they're going to achieve higher performance. What's the big deal?

Re:Some care to explain

[kellyb9]

I think the point is to keep it in the intellectual realm - colleges, hospitals, research, etc. As its been explained to me, internet2 is what the internet was supposed to be. It would make sense, in this instance, to keep them seperate.

Re:Some care to explain

[nuzak]

Would someone like to explain, for the benefit of us still in the dark, why internet 2 can't just be connected to the rest of the internet

Because it was built for research purposes that don't include being oversubscribed by ISP's that are disinterested in maintaining the infrastructure.

Re:Some care to explain

[Talderas]

Would someone like to explain, for the benefit of us still in the dark, why internet 2 can't just be connected to the rest of the internet? I mean, if I have a machine whose hardware and software enable it to accept incoming connections and push data in and out super fast, why does it matter who connects to it? If someone who old gear connects, they're going to run at the limits of their gear. If someone with new gear like mine connects, they're going to achieve higher performance. What's the big deal? Look at the unwashed masses. You want to let THEM into Internet2? Internet2 is like that club where you have to know someone who knows someone to just get into it.

Re:Some care to explain

[skiingyac]

I think your question has mostly been answered by the replies already, but also wanted to further point out that Internet2 is not necessarily faster than the Internet, it is more about studying the a new/different architecture.

Last I knew my university's regular Internet connection, which is used at something like 1/4 of its capacity at peak times by the 25k or so users, was several times times faster than the university's Internet2 connection.

Re:Some care to explain

[sexconker]

Academia.

Internet2 is a bunch of bullshit some researches dreamed up to get grant money. They spouted a bunch of shit about preserving the integrity of research and education, keeping the evil corporations out of Internet2, etc. etc.

So now they're laying / buying new cables between major universities and other "noble" institutions. This is a HUGE cost, and the corporations make tons of money off of it - they get to sell new equipment, and someone has to be contracted out to lay those cables. Sometimes they'll lease dedicated lines from existing ISPs - and that costs $$$$.

It's a walled garden approach - they think they're better than you, and they won't let you in. But the bottom line is that Internet2 is just a huge waste of money. Aside from a few minor infrastructure design changes, it's just another a Internet.

And when you let those professors and college kids on it, it's going to be filled with zombies, spammers, porn, myspace clones, piracy, RIAA/MPAA legal threats, etc.

How will the RIAA/MPAA get onto the closed network? Simple - a research grant to some professor to monitor and catalog network statistics on that newfangled Internet2.

There will eventually be some bomb threat or suicide note posted on Internet2, academia in all it's mighty wisdom will handle it 100% incorrectly, and politicians will champion the need for oversight on these new private networks.

In the end, Internet2, at best, will simply be a carpool lane - less traffic if you're riding with your college buddies. Academia loves loves loves loves money just as much as any "evil corporation" and will eventually sell passes to certain companies to let them ride their tubes, and eventually set up shop on the side of their road.

Basically, a huge waste of money so some people in academia can pat themselves on the back.

Re:Some care to explain

[Anonymous Coward]

Likely because they're only going to let you use IPV 246 as a protocol

Re:Some care to explain

[bockelboy]

The Internet2 is a clever name for a semi-public, semi-private ISP which provides a large amount of bandwidth to universities. The way they can afford to do this is by having a private network only between paying universities and not having to pay for network data to travel across commercial networks.
Oh yeah, and it also performs some research. Note how none of it even comes up in the article

Re:Some care to explain

[Mateo13]

Look at the unwashed masses. You want to let THEM into Internet2? Internet2 is like that club where you have to know someone who knows someone to just get into it. Um no it's not. You just have to go to a school or work for a company thats hooked up to it. I really don't see what all the commotion is about. Universities have there own networks...big whoop.

Goodbye...

[Anonymous Coward]

Goodbye freedom...hello slavery

That is the main difference between what we have today and what is planned for the future. No thanks internet2, I want to say and read what I like.

Analogy

[QuantumFlux]

You can look at Internet2 to the regular Internet as ESPN2 is to regular ESPN.

Oh, wait, this is Slashdot. Nobody's going to understand that...

Re:Analogy

[dwye]

You can look at Internet2 to the regular Internet as ESPN2 is to regular ESPN.

Oh, wait, this is Slashdot. Nobody's going to understand that...

So Mike and Mike have a morning drive-time broadcast on the Internet2, as well?

Internet2

[Anonymous Coward]

All of this Web 2.0 stuff I keep hearing about: will I have to get this Internet2 to use it?

File Sharing!

[MrCrassic]

Anyone remember when Internet2 was big for file-sharing? I was actually never able to get on this when it was popular, but I heard that super blazingly fast speeds were the norm when using this.

As far as it being commercially viable, I think a lot of academia would have problems with that. Even though the "Internet" seems to be outdated (which I don't understand, as IPv6 is surfacing and then there's this Web 2.0 thing), Internet2 was and still is the playground for most of the academics to try stuff out on. They might not like it if they had to share that bandwidth with tons of MySpace or ESPN-checking subscribers...

Re:File Sharing!

[QuantumFlux]

About 5-6 years ago, I worked at an academic research lab with access to Internet2. I remember being absolutely amazed that I could download RedHat ISOs (from another University's mirror) in just about 2 minutes.

Haven't had any real experience with it since, but I was certainly impressed at the time.

Re:File Sharing!

[Rallion]

I used it for a bit of file-sharing. It was pretty amazing.

Re:File Sharing!

[X0563511]

Web2.0 doesn't really have anything to do with "the internet". Web2.0 just has to do with a small subset of protocols and applications.

The internet is just a smidgen bigger than www.

Re:File Sharing!

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a 10mbit wall jack, in my dorm room. I got the full 10mbits from anyone on the Internet2 p2p program, anywhere in the US.

Yes, it was awesome.

Misconception

[realjd]

It seems that there is a common misconception that the internet2 is this great, new internet. It's not. It's just a set of private, high speed network links connecting research institutes that operates transparently with the regular internet. They configure their routers to route traffic onto the faster, internet2 backbone if the destination is also on the internet2 backbone. If a student at Purdue, for instance, types "mit.edu" into Firefox, the website will be served over the internet2 backbone instead of the regular, slower internet. It made for some excellent P2P downloads when I was in school. There was even a DC++ hub restricted to IP addresses at internet2 schools so as to guarantee crazy fast downloads.

Re:Misconception

[Digi-John]

Yes, somebody who apparently knows how I2 works! We're on I2 at my university, and that's how it works... Linux users, make sure to choose universities (Georgia Tech is a good one, I think) when you're selecting repositories/ISO download sites. And yes, we used to have a DC hub (DC++ is the client) on I2, but that got shut down at least 2 years ago; I never used it because it left the university network and could not be trusted.

Basically, mod parent up Informative.

Re:Misconception

[Kadin2048]

Just wanted to say thanks for actually explaining the damn thing.

That makes a lot more sense; I had been imagining two totally separate, air-gapped networks (like the secure MilNets), and that just seemed like a giant pain in the ass for no real gain.

Laying extra backbone capacity for educational/research use doesn't seem like a bad idea. (Although what happened to all that dark fiber people were talking about a few years ago? Is it all in regular revenue use now? Or are they using some of that for projects like Internet2?)

Honestly I think calling it "Internet2" is just confusing; it gives people (myself included) the impression that it's more of a separate network than it really is. If your explanation is correct, it's not really a 'separate' network at all. (It's still using IANA/ICANN for address and domain name coordination, so it's not an entirely parallel system.)

Re:Misconception

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux users, make sure to choose universities (Georgia Tech is a good one, I think) when you're selecting repositories/ISO download sites. While I suppose most of the Linux repositories/ISOs are likely to be at universities that are on i2, this is probably a good place to introduce the disclaimer that nowhere near all universities are on it.

When I was applying for grad schools, out of curiosity I looked to see which of the places I was applying were on i2 - only one out of the five was.

It seems that most of the universities on i2 are those that are either fairly large or have a heavy research emphasis or both. Which makes sense considering its purpose.

(For anyone who may or may not be curious, though I suspect most of you won't be, I ended up going with the one that was on i2, but purely for other reasons. Vaguely amusing coincidence though.)

If only ...

[ThirdPrize]

Just imagine a world where websites worked on every browser, where websites and URLs are a bit more logical, where you don't need 5 different techniologies to do one thing. Imagine an internet was designed to work properly.

Now look at what we have. A dozen groups trying to do their own thing a dozen different ways with a dozen different technologies. Some say the way the internet evolved is its greatest feature while i say it is its worst.

There's a difference

[Moraelin]

Well, while that's true, there's a difference: back then it didn't have a real competitor.

The Internet grew to fill, basically, a void that had existed there for ever. Yes, there were alternatives like snail mail, and later some proprietary closed networks, but none of them offered quite the same things.

By contrast, now Internet 2 would come to compete head to head with Internet 1. Which already gives most people what they want.

Even the incentive to do some work to bring it down to the masses, well, it was there for Internet 1, it's just not there for Internet 2. There were a lot of people (some academia, some enthusiasts, some companies, etc) working to figure out what else they can use these newfangled packet-switched networks for, and how they can make that service accessible for more people. (E.g., to be able to sell it to more people.) And not just because they liked tinkering with high-tech toys, but because there was a genuine opportunity to do something which hasn't been done before. Is there a similar itch to scratch in the case of Internet 2? Is there something we all need and which can't be done with the Internet 1?

Obsolete

[snooz_crash]

"The Internet as we now know it is anything but obsolete..."

The uses, as far as news broadcasts, social sites, and a myriad commercial apps are not obsolete. However, isn't the exhaustion of IPv4 an obsolencence, given no viable plan for IPv6?
"As of November 2007, a daily updated report projected that the IANA pool of unallocated addresses would be exhausted in May 2010, with the various Regional Internet Registries using up their allocations from IANA in April 2011."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6

Good idea - long ago

[Anonymous Coward]

Internet2 was a good idea many years ago when the Internet was so congested. Now it uses the same technologies and runs at the same speed as the Internet.

But they have done a great PR job with the "Internet2" name. People still think it's going to deliver something.

Re:I already downloaded Internet1

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's just not funny.

catch 22.0

[mattwarden]

The reason internet2 won't pick up is because it is stuck in a catch 22.0 No one will upgrade internet2 to web 2.0 until enough people come from internet1 to internet2. But why would anyone leave internet1 with web 2.0 to go to internet2 with web 1.0? It doesn't make sense.

Internet2 is for porn too.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.net.princeton.edu/traceroute.html not a member of the Internet2 consortium) 1 gigagate1 (128.112.128.114) 0.498 ms 0.289 ms 0.265 ms 2 vgate1 (128.112.12.22) 0.483 ms 0.319 ms 0.305 ms 3 patriotgate (204.153.48.14) 0.989 ms 0.976 ms 0.917 ms 4 g-4-1.hlb-c2.patmedia.net (24.225.237.173) 1.276 ms 0.838 ms 0.978 ms 5 reserved.above.net.48.184.208.in-addr.arpa (208.184.48.197) 2.612 ms 2.689 ms 2.943 ms 6 so-0-2-0.mpr2.dca2.us.above.net (64.125.26.105) 8.615 ms 43.063 ms 67.368 ms 7 xe-1-1-0.er2.iad10.above.net (64.125.26.242) 8.484 ms 9.012 ms 8.725 ms 8 xe-0-0-0.er1.iad10.above.net (64.125.26.233) 9.155 ms 8.583 ms 8.600 ms 9 above-google-1.iad10.us.above.net (64.125.13.154) 10.160 ms 9.032 ms 9.015 ms 10 216.239.48.108 (216.239.48.108) 9.210 ms 216.239.48.112 (216.239.48.112) 9.222 ms 216.239.48.108 (216.239.48.108) 9.129 ms 11 209.85.252.165 (209.85.252.165) 27.414 ms 216.239.46.224 (216.239.46.224) 36.738 ms 209.85.252.165 (209.85.252.165) 27.958 ms 12 72.14.236.27 (72.14.236.27) 39.443 ms 72.14.238.89 (72.14.238.89) 27.583 ms 66.249.95.126 (66.249.95.126) 9.970 ms 13 64.233.175.26 (64.233.175.26) 26.073 ms 38.275 ms 64.233.175.42 (64.233.175.42) 28.016 ms 14 py-in-f99.google.com (64.233.167.99) 27.984 ms 29.294 ms 27.645 ms Put in mit.edu(a member of the Internet2 consortium) in: 1 gigagate1 (128.112.128.114) 0.491 ms 0.335 ms 0.318 ms 2 vgate1 (128.112.12.22) 0.349 ms 0.320 ms 0.310 ms 3 local1.princeton.magpi.net (216.27.98.113) 1.842 ms 2.749 ms 2.306 ms 4 remote.internet2.magpi.net (216.27.100.54) 4.119 ms 3.789 ms 4.243 ms 5 nox300gw1-Vl-110-NoX-INTERNET2.nox.org (192.5.89.221) 8.834 ms 27.282 ms 8.728 ms 6 nox1sumgw1-Vl-803-NoX.nox.org (192.5.89.237) 8.620 ms 8.756 ms 8.609 ms 7 207.210.143.110 (207.210.143.110) 383.144 ms 1030.692 ms 786.370 ms 8 W92-RTR-1-BACKBONE.MIT.EDU (18.168.0.25) 27.733 ms 21.215 ms 20.024 ms 9 WEB.MIT.EDU (18.7.22.69) 20.476 ms 20.206 ms 19.026 ms Faster access between colleges.

InternetXP

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no way I'm going to upgrade to this Internet2 (Codenamed InternetVista). InternetXP has been meeting my needs for a long time now.

I've heard rumors that this InternetVista has faster start times, runs faster, and is able to turn lead into gold. We all know that's just marketing. InternetXP meets all our needs. And with the latest SpeedPower3 my cable provider just came out with, InternetXP SP3 is as fast as any InternetVista out there.

I've heard rumors InternetVista will require completely new hardware. Bad. InternetXP SP3 runs well with my current hardware. No big infrastructure upgrades.

I'm sure there are some fanboys who will be promoting the new Web2.0 (Codenamed Panther or Tiger or something)but that's irrelevant.

Internet2 is connected to the Dorms Network

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.net.princeton.edu/traceroute.html

Put in google.com (not a member of the Internet2 consortium)

1 gigagate1 (128.112.128.114) 0.498 ms 0.289 ms 0.265 ms
2 vgate1 (128.112.12.22) 0.483 ms 0.319 ms 0.305 ms
3 patriotgate (204.153.48.14) 0.989 ms 0.976 ms 0.917 ms
4 g-4-1.hlb-c2.patmedia.net (24.225.237.173) 1.276 ms 0.838 ms 0.978 ms
5 reserved.above.net.48.184.208.in-addr.arpa (208.184.48.197) 2.612 ms 2.689 ms 2.943 ms
6 so-0-2-0.mpr2.dca2.us.above.net (64.125.26.105) 8.615 ms 43.063 ms 67.368 ms
7 xe-1-1-0.er2.iad10.above.net (64.125.26.242) 8.484 ms 9.012 ms 8.725 ms
8 xe-0-0-0.er1.iad10.above.net (64.125.26.233) 9.155 ms 8.583 ms 8.600 ms
9 above-google-1.iad10.us.above.net (64.125.13.154) 10.160 ms 9.032 ms 9.015 ms
10 216.239.48.108 (216.239.48.108) 9.210 ms 216.239.48.112 (216.239.48.112) 9.222 ms 216.239.48.108 (216.239.48.108) 9.129 ms
11 209.85.252.165 (209.85.252.165) 27.414 ms 216.239.46.224 (216.239.46.224) 36.738 ms 209.85.252.165 (209.85.252.165) 27.958 ms
12 72.14.236.27 (72.14.236.27) 39.443 ms 72.14.238.89 (72.14.238.89) 27.583 ms 66.249.95.126 (66.249.95.126) 9.970 ms
13 64.233.175.26 (64.233.175.26) 26.073 ms 38.275 ms 64.233.175.42 (64.233.175.42) 28.016 ms
14 py-in-f99.google.com (64.233.167.99) 27.984 ms 29.294 ms 27.645 ms

Put in mit.edu(a member of the Internet2 consortium) in:
1 gigagate1 (128.112.128.114) 0.491 ms 0.335 ms 0.318 ms
2 vgate1 (128.112.12.22) 0.349 ms 0.320 ms 0.310 ms
3 local1.princeton.magpi.net (216.27.98.113) 1.842 ms 2.749 ms 2.306 ms
4 remote.internet2.magpi.net (216.27.100.54) 4.119 ms 3.789 ms 4.243 ms
5 nox300gw1-Vl-110-NoX-INTERNET2.nox.org (192.5.89.221) 8.834 ms 27.282 ms 8.728 ms
6 nox1sumgw1-Vl-803-NoX.nox.org (192.5.89.237) 8.620 ms 8.756 ms 8.609 ms
7 207.210.143.110 (207.210.143.110) 383.144 ms 1030.692 ms 786.370 ms
8 W92-RTR-1-BACKBONE.MIT.EDU (18.168.0.25) 27.733 ms 21.215 ms 20.024 ms
9 WEB.MIT.EDU (18.7.22.69) 20.476 ms 20.206 ms 19.026 ms

Faster access between colleges. Resnet tends to be connected to the internet2 router as well.....

More than just the network

[cllajoie]

Disclaimer: I've worked with Internet2 for about 8 years. Now I work with the LHC guys, too.

Internet2 has been on Slashdot a number of times. Each time people focus on the network. To me be fair the networking stuff is kind of cool. They're doing some interesting things; tackling some hard problems, providing feedback to hardware vendors that makes their products a bit better, dealing with various political aspects of international networking. All nice things.

However, the networking group is only one of 5 areas within the Internet2 group. Some of the areas are real stinkers and, as best as I've ever been able to tell, produce nothing of value. Others though do. Years ago I saw a presentation from the engineering group about various TCP/IP projects they were working on. Some dealt with intelligent back-off algorithms, some with various aspects of IPv6, a few with QoS that actually worked. The Middleware group, with which I work, has produced some nice work to help educational institutions record basic person information in a standard way (doesn't sound very exciting but it can sure help if you're an app writer). The Shibboleth project, and the related OpenSAML project, deal with making user data available in a secure and privacy preserving way (in theory it wold preclude any more lost laptops with millions of user records). It has seen adoption by various schools, governments, realtor software vendors, and others.

So, the point, I guess, is that it's not just about the network. Another point is that I doubt I2 will be around much longer. The recent failure to merge with NLR, a process that was like watching two of the greasiest used car salemens try to screw each other over, was probably the death toll.

Re:More than just the network

[Diakoneo]

Thank you! I couldn't believe I went through all the posts and everyone was talking like Internet2 is a thing.
Internet2 is a "non-profit consortium which develops and deploys advanced network applications and technologies." What everyone is referring to here is called the Abilene Network."

There is SOME peering, but at higher levels

[Danathar]

For example bittorrent users that are on networks that have connections to I2 and the regular internet act as proxies between each network.

Neither one knows about it, but the packets flow between the networks via p2p applications like bittorrent.

I think there IS some opportunity for some commercial providers though. College students use a LOT of bandwidth for many things like gmail, etc.

Having a presence on I2 might be good for some things like gmail.

internet2: usa only?

[core_tripper]

http://www.internet2.edu/pubs/networkmap.pdf Good thing they made a little turning in the detroit - cleveland connection otherwise Canada would be on the internet2.

Internet not obsolete?

[Kargan]

If you consider SMTP to be part of the Internet, I highly disagree.

SMTP was never designed to do what it does today, and must be replaced as quickly as possible. It's been obsolete for a long while now.

Internet2 = failure

[Anonymous Coward]

Internet2 = driven in great part by higher ed institutions that are poorly organized. Just take a look at their middleware which is crap and they can't get any decent push behind. The whole thing is in the handbasket and is so close to hell it's burning up.

DO NOT LET THEM

[Anonymous Coward]

Internet 2 is a plan to restrict, then take away our freedom online. The internet is our last outlet for free speech and information. Make no mistake, the people in power hate this. They want total control like they have over our corporate media. If we let them get away with it, we are in a whole lot of trouble.

this is karma suicide but

[spazdor]

I imagined a 3 1/2 inch floppy with "internet" scribbled on the 3M label in Sharpie. And that made me smile a little. Up with GGP.

The Internet2 is for porn...

[Anonymous Coward]

> But Ars Technica looks more closely...

I'd like to look at some Ars more closely...

again?

[garphik]

I thought we already had web 2.0?