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?

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.

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.

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?

Waiting for Internet3

[WheresMyDingo]

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

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!

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

[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.

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.