Slashdot Mirror


Photonic Switching to Boost Internet Speeds

Da Massive writes "Researchers at the University of Sydney have developed technology that could boost the throughput of existing networks 100-fold without costing the consumer any more, and it's all thanks to a scratch on a piece of glass. After four years of development, University of Sydney scientists say the Internet is set to become, on average, 60 times faster than existing networks. According to the Centre for Ultra-high bandwidth Devices for Optical Systems (CUDOS) at the University's School of Physics, the scratch will mean almost instantaneous, error-free and unlimited access to the Internet anywhere in the world."

207 comments

  1. Without costing the consumer any more? by neokushan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ha! The technology might not cost much more, but ISP's will milk consumers for all they're worth.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
    1. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by verbatim_verbose · · Score: 1

      So true. It'll be quite some time before we can get significant speed increases without significant price increases as well.

    2. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Daryen · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Not only that, but as far as I know this would require different lines (we aren't running scratched glass right now), and different switches and such to receive those new lines.

      They're claiming this is 60x faster than current technology, and that it carries a terabit per second. While it's true that it may be 60x faster than technology IN PLACE, we already have optical fiber technology capable of multiple terabit connections. So considering the cost of upgrade, and the fact that existing infrastructure will need to be replaced, what exactly is novel here?

      While I did RTFA, (yeah, yeah, I'm new here) it was incredibly light on detail, maybe I missed something that would make this an actual advancement?

    3. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I thought it was about photonic switching, not the actual fiber cables itself. Basically there's loads of dark fiber because the switches aren't fast enough or powerful enough to use it all. A photonic switch can make use of it all, and also make use of the full capacity of the fiber rather than have the line speed limited by the switches.

      So, you'd need new switches at either end of each fiber cable. I don't know how often backbone switches are replaced, but I could see that happening within 3 years.

    4. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not to mention that it's ridiculous to say the internet will be faster than existing networks.. the internet IS existing networks

    5. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I thought the US was a capitalistic society with prices determined by free market competition?

      *snicker*

    6. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Jimmy+King · · Score: 1

      But it is accurate if you take consumer to mean consumer of the network hardware that uses this functionality, which would be the ISP. Obviously the ISPs will charge more if they can find a reason.

    7. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Jimmy+King · · Score: 1

      I think it's pretty clear that "existing networks" means the networks currently in existence, like right now, when the article was written.

    8. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Sadly (if you see it that way), this technology will probably never gain a large enough foothold for it to become truly widespread (because it's just so damn much to replace).

      It seems like a pretty popular thing to do these days to announce some marvelous breakthrough in technology to get everyone excited -- and then never speak of it again.

    9. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by smussman · · Score: 1

      So basically, they're saying that future networks will be faster than current networks?

      And this surprises us why?

    10. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it *WAS*

    11. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Luthe_Faydwire · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most of the core devices in carrier grade networks have an expected five year lifetime before being moved closer to the edge. May system have edge devices that were bought 10+ years ago.

      Without many more details it would be impossible to judge when this would be avaialble to the average consumer.

      That is not to say that you might not see an performance boost because google was able to upgrade the youtube connection.

    12. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously the ISPs will charge more if they can find people willing to pay more.

      There, fixed it for you.

    13. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by MadnessASAP · · Score: 1

      Well in a few years it'll be time to replace switches, after all technology does get obsolete nad parts do break. so when that time comes then perhaps they will replace them with these nifty new switches.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    14. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      This will be problematic for the ISPs because now who are they going to blame for bad network design? If P2P can use all their bandwidth now, and this gives them >60% more bandwidth, what are they going to do? In the court of public opinion, it will be demanded that ISPs upgrade to increase bandwidth, and then they will have to explain that the problem is either poor network design or traffic is slowed so they can inspect packets deeply for terrorist activity.

      Either way, this is not good for them as it will stick the egg to their face in a rather unseemly way.

    15. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by doc_doofus · · Score: 3, Funny

      nad parts do break

      I hate it when that happens.

      --
      Disclaimer:IANAL/MD/PhD-Just the local yokel PC "doc" ~If you're not having fun, then you are probably doing it wrong.
    16. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by flitty · · Score: 1

      Strangely enough, Comcast customers say this new network "doesn't seem any faster" and their torrents are being d/l at the same rate.

      --
      Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
    17. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by VdG · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it's a wonderful development and will do some good but ultimately it'll just move the performance bottleneck somewhere else.

    18. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and I thought EuroDisney wouldn't suck so bad.

    19. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it won't cost the consumer more ... unless the consumer expects that the last mile will speed up too.

    20. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whoa whoa whoa whoa WHOA
      GTFO!

    21. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by UNKN · · Score: 0

      Oh hell yes they will. They will all conclude that they have faster internet thanks to their new scratch technology, and charge me 30 bucks more a month for it. This 30 dollars will of course be for the throttled version, because heaven forbid we have full access and I can actually play games online at break neck speeds.

    22. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by GeffDE · · Score: 1

      Of course future networks will be faster, silly. Because they'll use the new technology (which surprises us) talked about in the article. Sheesh, no need to be so dense.

      --
      It has been a nervous year, with people beginning to feel like Christian Scientists with appendicitis.
    23. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by rebelcan · · Score: 1

      That's always the case when upgrading network equipment. There's always going to be a bottleneck somewhere, an upgrade just moves the bottleneck. Even if you upgrade everything all at once, there will still be a bottleneck, it might just take you a while to find it ( or use up enough bandwidth to notice it ).

      --
      God is dead -- Nietzsche
      Nietzsche is dead -- God
      Zombie Nietzsche lives! -- Zombie Nietzsche
    24. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by thelamecamel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yep, that's almost it. Optical switches/routing would speed everything up by a lot. But an optical router is a long way off - one of the unsolved problems is buffering light to avoid packet collisions. At the moment, light can be slowed down quite a bit (actually the record is 17 m/s - slower than a cyclist), but everyone is still working out how to store it reliably for long enough to build a router. There are other problems as well.

      The advance that has been made is about time division demultiplexing - sending 64 different 10Gbit signals down a single fibre, and then being able to separate out the individual signals at the end. They've been able to separate one of these out using a 5cm long waveguide, of a new material called chalcogenide (As2 S3) which is being researched heavily at CUDOS.

    25. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      Almost - it is about decreasing the amount of dark fibre, but this advance isn't an optical switch (which is some way off), this is a new advance in optical time division demultiplexing. 64 x 10Gbit/s signals were sent down a fibre. 640Gbit/s is too fast for electronics to handle, but 10Gbit/s is manageable. These researchers were able to pluck out any of the 64 10Gbit/s signals into another fibre to be processed by electronics, without destroying the other 63.

    26. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      Almost - it is about decreasing the amount of dark fibre, but this advance isn't an optical switch (which is some way off), this is a new advance in optical time division demultiplexing. 64 x 10Gbit/s signals were sent down a fibre. 640Gbit/s is too fast for electronics to handle, but 10Gbit/s is manageable. These researchers were able to pluck out any of the 64 10Gbit/s signals into another fibre to be processed by electronics, without destroying the other 63.

    27. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      ah bugger. i came from google news and was wondering why my comments weren't appearing. Then I change browser and submit again. Then I check the date and the timezone. Then I track down the story from the front page and see multiple copies of all my comments :-/

    28. Re:Without costing the consumer any more? by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, CUDOS is not funded to do science for the sake of it, it's funded to do useful things that get implemented. This particular result is just the latest record, and will be beaten before anything sees implementation, but I'm sure some of these technologies will be implemented - electronics simply can't handle 640Gbps signals on its own, these signals need to be demultiplexed by optics, and this is the best result so far.

      At the moment, the alternative technology to this is laying more cables. And that's very expensive.

  2. without costing the consumer any more?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yer right!

  3. Yeah? by the_mind_ · · Score: 5, Funny

    "without costing the consumer any more"

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    after reading the prices on Telstras new iPhone plans i needed a good laugh

    --
    You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
    1. Re:Yeah? by baker_tony · · Score: 1

      You're lucky, in NZ it's $250 per month for 1GB of data! http://www.geekzone.co.nz/iphone/5335

    2. Re:Yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      We need lots of articles with prominent claims of "boosting speeds and lowering prices" so that some of that thought may seep into the non-geek world so more and more people may start asking why their ISP charges so much. This could possibly catch the attention of politicians, who while often are bought by industry, need to maintain the appearance of fighting for the little guy.

    3. Re:Yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're lucky, in NZ it's $250 per month for 1GB of data!
      http://www.geekzone.co.nz/iphone/5335

      Pffft. That's 1638.4 times as much as out to be enough for anybody.

    4. Re:Yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CUDOS to the Aussies who came up with this tech :D
      Too bad ISPs will rip off consumers instead of competing.

    5. Re:Yeah? by professorguy · · Score: 1
      You're lucky, in northern NH (US) it'd take 250 HOURS to download 1GB of data!

      .

      "Boo-hoo, I have access to massive bandwidth, but it's expensive." I can only WISH I had such access at that price.

    6. Re:Yeah? by slater86 · · Score: 1

      and they said about building them from scratch too....Wait what did the article say again?

      --
      When people ask if I'm an optimist, I say "I hope so". --Bill Bailey
    7. Re:Yeah? by baker_tony · · Score: 1

      Really? I had no idea satellite Internet couldn't reach northern NH. Stink for you indeed!

  4. In this house we respect the laws of physics by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 2, Funny

    Speed of light, anyone?

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 3, Funny

      Disregard that, I suck cocks - err the article was talking about throughput not speed of transfer.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    2. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by Icarium · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Throughput != Latency

      It has always amused me how commonly businesses play fast and loose with the meaning of the word 'speed' when it comes to internet connections. Yes, higher bandwidth will result in a 'faster' internet experience, but the data is not actually getting to you any faster - you're simply getting more of it at a time, so the webpage/download whatever completes in s shorter space of time.

      You can drive faster than a truck, but if you're delivering more than your vehicle can carry, that slow ass truck is still going to complete the delivery in less time.

      Argh, pet peeve, bad car analogy and all, brought about by years of listening to online gamers brag about how they've got the fastest connection and then crying when it makes no difference to thier gaming experience.

      Anyway, the article is a bit light on details - can't quite make out if they're talking about increased bandwidth or increasing routing efficiency.

    3. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2, Funny

      A great reference.

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    4. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by somersault · · Score: 4, Informative

      Since the title says 'switching', I'm guessing it's routing efficiency. I've not RTFA but I'm planning to in a minute if that makes things any better ;)

      Totally agree with you about the latency thing. I was reading reviews of Battlefield Bad Company for the PS3 the other day, someone has said "this game has no lag!". While the server/client communication may be more efficient than other similar online games, there's no way it will have 'no' lag (which I would equate to latency). And in fact, when I've been playing it myself some games have had some serious lag anyway, which I doubt was my own connection as connecting to a new server tends to sort out the problem. I seem to get a lot of dropped packets on some servers as my character actually drifts backwards :s

      Most people just don't know what they're talking about when it comes to things like networking, but they'll try to pretend they do*. What else is new..

      * that's what I do anyway \o/ these suckers are paying me to administrate their network and I have no idea what a subnet mask looks like, or why a subnet would even want to hide its identity

      --
      which is totally what she said
    5. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need to add casual homophobia to today's thought crimes.

      Not all people that willingly suck cocks would want to be seen in your company either.

    6. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I colocate my gaming rig at a major IX you insensitive clod! =)

    7. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can't use truck metaphors anymore. we all know its just a series of tubes.

    8. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not what your mom said last night. Or maybe she did - my cock was in her mouth and I really couldn't understand her!

    9. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Latency is also a per message cost, so large transfers amortize this over time very well. Many small messages will cost you a relatively large amount, however. So it really depends on how much latency is currently caused by the routers that would be replaced versus what will remain between end points.

    10. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you washed your cock more often, someone might suck it, and then you'd have to change your tune, unless you're suggesting you like having sex with animals?

    11. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      You have a painful misunderstanding of sexuality and sensuality. Must've never had a good relationship; there's a point of pair bonding that relates.

    12. Re:In this house we respect the laws of physics by TylerTyler · · Score: 1

      Speed of light, anyone?

      Throughput

  5. i for one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    welcome our photonic switching internet overlords

    1. Re:i for one by JustOK · · Score: 3, Funny

      You can blame me. I voted for CUDOS

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    2. Re:i for one by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 2, Funny

      Photonic Switching?

      is there any chance this technology could be used in torpedoes?

      --
      -I only code in BASIC.-
    3. Re:i for one by Kamineko · · Score: 2, Funny

      Screw that, I voted for GLADOS.

    4. Re:i for one by zolaar · · Score: 2, Funny

      If so, it would serve as a jumping-off point for quantum computing in our lifetimes -- scientists would simply paint the bits blue instead of red.

      --
      One man's constant is another man's variable.
    5. Re:i for one by Anonymous+Buzzword · · Score: 1

      Photonic Switching? is there any chance this technology could be used in torpedoes?

      Not torpedos, sharks! Sharks with fast switching frikkin laser beams attached to their heads.

    6. Re:i for one by TheMidnight · · Score: 1

      If you stretch any further for a geeky, funny pop culture reference, you're going to look like Mr. Fantastic after a battle with the Silver Surfer at the rubber band factory.

    7. Re:i for one by clyde_cadiddlehopper · · Score: 1

      When you dig in, this does sound like Trekkie techno-babble! For example, I found the following: "A key milestone for planar Chalcogenide waveguide fabrication will be increasing the nonlinear Kerr effect attainable. We plan to extend the waveguide length from 24 cm to 50 cm through the design of a new photolithographic etch mask. We will also shrink the waveguide dimensions to reduce the cross-sectional mode area. This will increase the nonlinearity but also allow the waveguides to be dispersion engineered for four wave mixing applications. This will be tackled by reducing the film thickness during deposition. Additionally, a new electron beam writing system will be established to enable etching of waveguides to narrower (sub-micron) widths beyond the print resolution of the photolithographic system." Gotta run now. Time to adjust the modulation dampers on the dilithium matrix.

      --
      Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
    8. Re:i for one by Fumus · · Score: 1

      To make it even funnier, in Polish "cud" means "miracle".
      So all the CUDA and CUDOS are even more funny for us Poles.

  6. 1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by tomtomtom777 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "... this switch takes only one picosecond to change tracks. This means that in one second the switch is turning on and off about one million times. We are talking about photonic technology that has terabit per second capacity.

    I guess accurate reckoning was no requirement to be a part of the team...

    1. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or part of journalist team/editors

    2. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by bunratty · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's that darn metric system again. My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    3. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well maybe it switches in one picosecond and then waits for 1 million picoseconds before switching again. :)

    4. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by 4D6963 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Million, trillion, same thing!

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    5. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      Maybe the device needs to do something in between the switches, like actually sending some data?

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    6. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Albanach · · Score: 4, Funny

      Are you driving a Hummer? You go five meters on 238 litres of petrol?

    7. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      (I know, I know, off topic.)
      That sounds about right. I think the Hummer brand has been the biggest publicity disaster, among many, of the past decade for General Motors. I have to believe millions of people avoided buying Chevrolets, Buicks, Pontiacs, Cadillacs, and Saturns because they associate them with the makers of the best known gas-guzzling civilian vehicles in the United States.

    8. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forty rods is a furlong, which is much longer than 5 meters.
      He's getting about 0.002 miles per gallon; I'd say he's driving a luxury yacht.

    9. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by X3J11 · · Score: 1

      Put it in H!

      I await the inevitable off-topic moderation fearlessly.

    10. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Million, trillion, same thing!

      (Score:4, Informative)

      Crap, so that's why I failed math.

    11. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by JamesP · · Score: 1

      You go five meters on 238 litres of petrol?

      Are you insane??!?! Only the darnest kind of commie liberal hippie would drive a car with such high mpg!!11

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    12. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      The MP3 takes slightly longer to play once than the animated GIF.

      Hence, you watch it a dozen times, and it gets really badly out of sync......

      Much, much worse than.

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    13. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Honest question: Have you ever met a Hummer driver who used the metric system in everyday life?

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    14. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by shrikel · · Score: 4, Informative

      five meters on 238 litres of petrol

      Where in the world did you come up with that conversion?

      40 (rods per hogshead) = 0.843539102 meters per liter

      So you could go slightly over 200 meters with 238 liters of gasoline. Sheesh, you were off by a factor of 40!

      Ah, I guess you calculated 1 rod per hogshead.

      --
      Any sufficiently simple magic can be passed off as mere advanced technology.
    15. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by shrikel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Word probably autocorrected "million million" to just "million".

      --
      Any sufficiently simple magic can be passed off as mere advanced technology.
    16. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by mdd4696 · · Score: 1

      It's that darn metric system again. My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.

      Let's see... Google calculator tells me that 40 rods to the hogshead works out to about 0.00084 kilometers per liter, or 0.00198 miles per gallon.

      I blame you for global warming.

    17. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes the new hummer H4. Twice the tank si

    18. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Cosworth · · Score: 2, Funny

      He drives the space shuttle crawler.

    19. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      40 (rods per hogshead) = 5.9274075 liters per (5 meter)

      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&q=40+rods+per++hogshead+in+liters+per+5+meter&btnG=Search

    20. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Actually, and you can check with Verizon if you don't believe me, three extra zeros is no longer the same number. You can, however, add two more zeros and it's still the same.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    21. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by operagost · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm sure the average Joe is so retarded to ignore over 100 years of history and base his assumptions on a few vehicles manufactured in the last decade. Likewise, the average Joe believes that all Hondas are rice burners with coffee can tailpipes and all Porsches are ugly SUV abominations named after chili peppers.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    22. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Six zeros is different, too. My bad.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    23. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Consumer's memories don't extend that far. The domestic automakers screwed the pooch from about 1980 until 2000, and all of the work Chrysler, Ford, and especially General Motors have done since then to improve products is ignored by most people.

      Public relations is hugely important, especially for companies battling back from two decades of inferior products. The Hummer H2 is a public relations stake in GM's heart.

    24. Re:1 picosec/switch != 1 million switches/second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ten points to shrikel.
      "million million" appears in the original press release
      http://www.usyd.edu.au/news/84.html?newscategoryid=2&newsstoryid=2411

  7. The Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love it how in these news snippets there is never any explanation of the technology, but long descriptions about the wonderful changes it will do to the world.

    1. Re:The Scratch by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I love it how in these news snippets there is never any explanation of the technology, but long descriptions about the wonderful changes it will do to the world.

      Back in my day we didn't call it a "news snippet", we called it a "press release".

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    2. Re:The Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here goes gramps, telling them stories of his again.

    3. Re:The Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Back in my day we didn't call it a "press release", we called it "bullshit". Whilst walking uphill, backwards, in the snow.

    4. Re:The Scratch by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      With no shoes, while blindfolded.

      And carrying 15 tons of iron ore in a backpack.

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    5. Re:The Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too. It spares me from all the boring details that is only relevant to implementors anyway and gives me an idea of where I can actually apply the stuff. So glad you feel the same.

    6. Re:The Scratch by Gewalt · · Score: 1

      Maybe its just a sign of my rather old age, but I still call this "article" bullshit. Even tagged it so. I guess that does make me old.... sigh...

      --
      Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    7. Re:The Scratch by enoz · · Score: 1

      You got to *carry* the iron ore?

      We had to eat iron ore for breakfast.

      And that was after we finished cleaning the lake-bed with a toothbrush.

    8. Re:The Scratch by macker · · Score: 1

      Why didn't the just come out an say that the device uses "high-speed all-optical signal processing in compact, low-loss optical devices through the use of four-wave mixing (FWM) and cross-phase modulation (XPM) via the ultra fast Kerr effect??"

      --
      (T)he (O)ld (M)an
    9. Re:The Scratch by yorkrj · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's the technical explanation: http://www.cudos.org.au/cudos/research/Research.php ...and here's another topical piece: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=594743

    10. Re:The Scratch by the_olo · · Score: 1

      Man, that's the second time I have to clean my monitor's screen this month!

    11. Re:The Scratch by thelamecamel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yep, I'm in the research group concerned. It was pretty funny to look at the ways in which this story was distorted and Eggleton's soundbites were distorted.

      He was talking about two things:
      a) This new advance, which is about being able to pull a 10Gbps signal out of 64 time-division multiplexed 10Gbps signals (and was actually done by a group in Denmark/China, with one of our waveguides.
      b) The Photonic Chip, which is our long-term goal, of all-optical signal processing (e.g. an optical router).

    12. Re:The Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it had an accurate explanation you probably wouldn't understand it. But then, the journalists definitely wouldn't, so it'd never become news.

  8. Nah by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

    Now I will get 60x's the cap space, and I was worried I would have to cut back on my porn.

    --
    Knowledge = Power
    P= W/t
    t=Money
    Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    1. Re:Nah by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Nah..
      They will just same the same low cap to 120 times as many customers as before...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  9. if they succeed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    kudos to CUDOS

  10. I am not buying it..... by rimcrazy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Unless he is offering ponies with it. Ponies with wings!!!!!!!

    --
    "TV, a medium as it is neither rare nor well done." Ernie Kovacs
  11. Speed by Wowsers · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's all very well and good, but the last mile over here is over copper and based on the inaction of the TelCo, and the lack of REAL competition, will remain copper for another 100 years. So no matter how fast the IP packet takes to get to the exchange, it will be slowed down.

    --
    Take Nobody's Word For It.
    1. Re:Speed by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not just that last mile is a bottleneck. For the majority of services (even and sometimes especially the popular ones) there are also severe bottlenecks on the hosting end, many of which have nothing to do with bandwidth and/or latency.

      If any of the hops between (inclusive) you and the service has any capacity/speed problem, you'll notice it.

    2. Re:Speed by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, we need to push the price of copper so high that it becomes viable for the telco to dig up all the expensive copper cables, sell them, and replace them with cheap fibre.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:Speed by fjnunn · · Score: 1

      Thank you!! I wish more people understood the real driver of change.

    4. Re:Speed by bryce4president · · Score: 1

      And this is the thinking that has me paying $4 a gallon for gas. I like innovation, and I like preserving our earth, but not at the expense of the working man's sanity.

    5. Re:Speed by OglinTatas · · Score: 1

      The price doesn't need to get high enough for the telco to dig it up, it only has to get high enough for thieves to steal it for recycling. It's already starting to happen in places.
      http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5879297.html

      thieves also break into foreclosed houses to loot the copper.

    6. Re:Speed by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Recycling existing copper would prevent more open-pit copper mining = good for the earth.

    7. Re:Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would the price be high if nobody wants copper? because as you're saying fibre is cheaper and faster in your weird universe

    8. Re:Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please do, my country's economy (Chile) depends mostly on the price of copper. You will make us all rich!

    9. Re:Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My copper was just stolen for its scrap value, presumably. Does that mean I'm going photonic?

    10. Re:Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, we need to push the price of copper so high that it becomes viable for the telco to dig up all the expensive copper cables, sell them, and replace them with cheap fibre.

      Or the meth addicts start doing it for them...

    11. Re:Speed by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      For data cabling copper is a poor choice, fibre is a lot better...
      For electrical cabling, or situations where heat must be conducted (heatsinks etc), copper is a good choice. We need to make sure it's used where appropriate.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  12. These advances will allow by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

    users to access pornography at a speed previously only dreamed of!

    1. Re:These advances will allow by Ngarrang · · Score: 2, Funny

      lively.com might even feel faster with this new switching technology!

      --
      Bearded Dragon
  13. pico/mega/terra by tal_mud · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I thought this paragraph was a doozer:

    "This circuit uses the 'scratch' as a guide or a switching path for information - like when trains are switched from one track to another - except this switch takes only one picosecond to change tracks. This means that in one second the switch is turning on and off about one million times. We are talking about photonic technology that has terabit per second capacity."

    Am I missing something? A picosecond to switch tracks implies a million billion times per second. A million times per second is a snails pace. And then they refer to terrabit capacity? Everything seems to be off by orders of magnitude all over the place...

    1. Re:pico/mega/terra by j.a.mcguire · · Score: 1

      if 1mb is 1,000,000bp/s then a pico by your own definition is 1,000,000,000,000,000bp/s or 1,000,000,000mbp/s which is one billion mega bits per-second. One thousand mbp/s would be giga-bit, a million mbp/s would be a terra-bit, and one billion I believe would be peta-bit; 1pbp/s. So yes, sounds like they are off by an order or so.

    2. Re:pico/mega/terra by Vader82 · · Score: 1

      Yeah its amazing how often people screw this up. My guess is that he said "million billion" and the reporter went "huh?!" and wrote "million".

      Of course, everyone knows that with a period of 10^-15 you would get a frequency of 10^15. Erm, well make that everyone who knows a little bit about math and science.

    3. Re:pico/mega/terra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It obviously hasn't occurred to anyone else so I'll say it.

      Firstly you don't want a 50% duty cycle on a data switch. That would basically scatter your bits all over the world. You want to switch, then send some bits. So switching in a picosecond doesn't mean you'll switch *every* picosecond.

      Secondly, maybe it takes the picosecond switch a microsecond to recover before it can switch again.

      Or it may just be a bad piece of journalism.

      BTW a picosecond is a million millionth of a second not a million billionth of a second. The latter is a femtosecond. It goes milli, micro, nano, pico, femto. pico = 10^-12. You can see how easy it is to be off by 3 orders of magnitude, then ... ;)

  14. Is it just me by IceCreamGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    or does this article leave everyone else a little hungry in the "details" department? How does this mean "almost instantaneous, error-free and unlimited access to the Internet anywhere in the world...?" How will it not cost the consumer more? I feel like there's a story about breakthrough Tb switching tech every six months, and we haven't seen any of them deliver on these kinds of promises. They make it sound like you can just drop some glass in your existing switches and they magically become superpowered, whereas clearly if the technology ever actually matures to market we would be paying out the ass for these optics-enhanced switches and routers.

    1. Re:Is it just me by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      or does this article leave everyone else a little hungry in the "details" department?

      Details schmetails! Who needs details? This is a breakthrough! We should all be investing serious money in this "scratch photonics" switching technology! We'll be billionaires! Who cares how it works, all you need is hype!

    2. Re:Is it just me by SpinyNorman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In practical terms this means nothing for internet users since download speeds are invariably limited by the server or your local internet connection - not the backbone.

      Even in a hypothetical situation where you have a fiber (e.g. FiOS) internet connection and were connected to a server that required you to have a photonic home router to keep up, you'd still be ultimately throttled by your NIC, mobo bus, or CPU.

      Faster/cheaper switches may be exciting to backbone providers, but really that's about it.

    3. Re:Is it just me by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Don't forget latency! And it's more than just games. How many switches do my VoIP packets have to go through? Can this finally reduce the delay and make it more like talking over copper?

    4. Re:Is it just me by hoyd · · Score: 1

      that was funny..

    5. Re:Is it just me by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      I doubt it would make much difference there either. The biggest latencies for VoIP are likely also either your local connection (esp. if cable or DSL), local computer (Windows isn't exactly a real-time OS!) or the far end. Note incidently that you need 50-100ms (depends whether echo cancellation is being applied) to have an audible delay.

      For that matter, note that TFA is only about switching speed - but a router still needs to decide what switch to make. Your latency is only as good as the slowest link, so a photonic switch preceded by a silicon switching decision would be of little benefit.

    6. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here are some significant details to chew on.

      http://www.cudos.org.au/cudos/research/Chalcogenide.php

    7. Re:Is it just me by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Um... You're only talking over copper for the "last mile". Telephone signals are digitized at the central office and sent by fiberoptic cable to the other end's CO where it is converted back to analog for the "last mile" there.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    8. Re:Is it just me by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there fewer "switches" or their equivalent for digital voice compared to over IP?

    9. Re:Is it just me by WhoBeDaPlaya · · Score: 1

      I work in the photonics area. Would've been nice to know specs like polarization dependence, wavelength dependence, stress birefringence, mode-field diameter, coupling mechanism to fiber (vertical gratings of end-fire?), etc.

  15. one million times? by tsjaikdus · · Score: 0, Redundant

    except this switch takes only one picosecond to change tracks. This means that in one second the switch is turning on and off about one million times

    I think this should be (million x million)

  16. Australian Optical Last Mile by Centurix · · Score: 2, Funny

    To get to the more remote areas of Australia, sheep stations, mines etc., we will be retaining the same media delivery, but at a much slower rate, dictated by how fast Larry can turn his flashlight on and off...

    --
    Task Mangler
    1. Re:Australian Optical Last Mile by Bearpaw · · Score: 2, Funny
      G...'...d...a...y... ...m...a...t...e....... ...W...o...u...l...d... ...y...o...u... ...l...i...k...e... ...a... ...v...e...g...i...m...i...t...e... ...s...a...n...d...w

      NO CARRIER

  17. Magic? by VanessaE · · Score: 1
    So this will magically boost the speed of my LAN beyond the usual 10/100 without hardware changes? Sign me u... what? Optical? Bah. Wake me up when they come up with something for those of us that still use apparently obsolete copper wires.

    In all seriousness... Did anyone else notice how the article goes from picosecond switching of this device to switching "a million times" in one second? When did science redefine micro- and pico-? And the public demands "instant" web gratification? Somehow I don't buy into that either. Fast, sure, even to the point of nearly instant, but I doubt anyone cares whether a web page loads in 0.001 seconds versus 0.1. Think bigger, people - there's more to the Internet than just web pages, and there's far more to the web than just static load-it-once content. Think Youtube on steroids (and anti-psychotics, please!), VoIP that doesn't fail under heavy load (where QoS isn't practiced), faster data delivery for SETI/Folding/etc.. Hell, getting certain ISP's to give up on throttling while giving everyone a generic 20/5 or similar connection, without them bitching about network load, would be nice.

    (And did anyone else notice Slashdot's first-paragraph-break bug just got worse?)

    1. Re:Magic? by liquiddark · · Score: 1

      Wake me up when they come up with something for those of us that still use apparently obsolete copper wires.

      You mean like this?

    2. Re:Magic? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Did anyone else notice how the article goes from picosecond switching of this device to switching "a million times" in one second?

      I bet the original press release used "million million" to get around the British/US ambiguity about "trillion" and then a proofreader thought the repeat was a typo.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  18. Two comments by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

    I wasn't sure which to go with, so i'll give you both at once. Behold:

    CUDOS: Helping you reach your artificial bandwidth cap just that little bit quicker.

    and...

    TERRABIT PORN! I'll need another tube of KY... Hell, make it a catering vat.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Two comments by Barny · · Score: 1

      I think I might get some seagate shares myself.

      If something was to magically relieve the backbone bandwidth limits at all the telcos I think all the mass storage makers would be ecstatic.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    2. Re:Two comments by ZigMonty · · Score: 1

      TERRABIT PORN! I'll need another tube of KY... Hell, make it a catering vat.

      Jerking off to photos of bits of the earth?

  19. Whoa! You mean gigabit in my home? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm currently using 10Base2 coax to interconnect my VAX systems and PCs together in my basement. Do you mean to tell me that there is the potential to have something like a GIGABIT network in my house?!?! That would be cool... a gigabit hub or maybe a gigabit switch. I know, I know...I'm talking foolish and a gigabit switch would probably be $50,000 or some other, but I can dream can't I?

  20. well i do by unity100 · · Score: 1

    And the public demands "instant" web gratification?

  21. not the limit maybe by unity100 · · Score: 1

    since they managed to teleport a photon a while ago.

    1. Re:not the limit maybe by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      nah, they sent the information about the teleported photon by.... photons. Everyone still thinks that sending information faster than light is impossible.

  22. I had a lot of questions... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Like:
    What exactly do you mean by scratch?
    How does it switch?
    What wavelengths and materials does it work best with?
    How long to market?
    If this is a "photonic IC" how long until we can buy photonic logic units?
    Will this work with SOS (Silicon On Sapphire) technologies?

    But the insightful article cleared them all up. Psyche! No it didn't. I learned that apparently a scratch can act as a waveguide of some kind that switches very rapidly. I know that the average reader doesn't have a PhD in photonics, but come on!

    The paper will probably show up on their publications page soon. I don't think that the top link is about this new photonic switch, because 160Gbps isn't exactly 100x the speed of exiting 10Gbps fiber systems, but I'm not sure.

    1. Re:I had a lot of questions... by skoaldipper · · Score: 1

      Take 2 red and white Dixie straws, pinch one end on each, and tie them together with a very fast switching device. Now, imagine sucking banana bits from your milk shake along each red rail, versus one big banana chunk along a single white straw. Assuming the switching device between the two Dixie straws doesn't clog, enjoy the benefits of faster brain freeze. Parallel banana bit execution.

      Or, imagine a car as a photon. The car ...

      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    2. Re:I had a lot of questions... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 1

      Now, imagine sucking banana bits from your milk shake...

      So what you're saying is, this invention drinks my milkshake? It drinks it up?

    3. Re:I had a lot of questions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Article contains link to CUDOS and the description of the research (not a scientific paper yet) is pretty easy to reach.

      http://www.cudos.org.au/cudos/research/Chalcogenide.php

      How do they do it is not straightforward and IMHO impossible to explain in popular science article.

    4. Re:I had a lot of questions... by Thelasko · · Score: 4, Informative

      The paper showed up. Apparently it makes use of the Kerr effect. I'm speculating that it's more specifically kerr-lens modelocking.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    5. Re:I had a lot of questions... by thechao · · Score: 1

      so.... it's a *clever* scratch, and not just any scratch, then?

    6. Re:I had a lot of questions... by sootman · · Score: 1

      Funny, I had only one question: "What color is the sky in their world where companies pass savings along to the consumer?" For about two decades, audio CDs have been much, much cheaper to make than cassettes, but since the quality is higher and there are more features (instant random access) they cost more. (I don't know if cassettes are even still made, but the point is, they passed that point a long time ago and CDs are still around $15.) If my ISP could give me 100x the throughput and it cost them half as much to do so I'd be happy if they ONLY doubled my rates.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    7. Re:I had a lot of questions... by IronChef · · Score: 1

      While you are complaining about useless facts, I am planning on filling up 400 GB optical disks with error-free porn.

    8. Re:I had a lot of questions... by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      There was a post-deadline paper presented on this on Wednesday evening at the OECC/ACOFT conference, but I don't think there are any journal papers on it yet. Basically they used a 10Gbps pump, using four wave mixing to demultiplex a 640Gbps signal.

      Put simply, there were 640x10^9 pulses (or absences of pulses) per second, and the researchers were able to select every 64th pulse. They did this by pumping the fibre with 10x10^9 pulses per second, and when these pulses overlapped with the signal pulses, the signal pulses were frequency shifted by nonlinear effects. Once frequency shifted, it was relatively easy to separate them out from the other 630x10^9 pulses.

    9. Re:I had a lot of questions... by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      There's no journal paper on this yet - it was a postdeadline paper presented at a conference on Wednesday. It was actually done by researchers in Denmark and China, with a waveguide provided by CUDOS (CUDOS does not have a 640Gbps source). The conference paper cites a paper by CUDOS doing similar things with similar waveguides to demultiplex a 160Gbps signal - Pelusi et al, Photon. Technol. Lett., 19 (2007), p. 1496

      It actually uses four wave mixing, not the kerr effect.

    10. Re:I had a lot of questions... by WhoBeDaPlaya · · Score: 1

      That's interesting. The switch I'm working makes use of the Faraday effect (MO effect in transmission - Kerr is in reflection).

    11. Re:I had a lot of questions... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 1

      If you want, you can go buy InPhase Technology's holographic disk drive and do that now... Though I think the first disks are only 320GB.

  23. Re:Whoa! You mean gigabit in my home? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can already buy a gigagibt hub for about £30 and and the adapters and PCI adapters are less than £10. Not sure about VAX though.

  24. 60x faster? Poooooorn! by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

    Trek monster: The internet is for (vr) porn, the internet is for (vr) porn!

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  25. it's works like a train ... :) by rs232 · · Score: 1

    "This circuit uses the 'scratch' as a guide or a switching path for information - like when trains are switched from one track to another - except this switch takes only one picosecond to change tracks. This means that in one second the switch is turning on and off about one million times. We are talking about photonic technology that has terabit per second capacity"

    A picosecond is one trillionth (10 -12 ) of a second, or one millionth of a microsecond.

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
  26. Trash by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

    This article really doesn't say a lot of anything, except that fiber optics can automagically increase their speed 60 fold, which sounds, to say the least, suspect.

    I'm no physicist, but I'd say we need at least a little more than this to merit a slashdot.

  27. A phone conversation... by macbuzz01 · · Score: 1

    What department at the University of Syndney?

    CUDOS? Must be an affirming place to work... Who's your department head?

    Stuart Smalley? Do people like you?

  28. Anywhere in the world. by Thanshin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Speed and more speed...Speed isn't giving us freedom anytime soon.

    We need to invent a non blockable way of communicating before the governments of the world unite in locking internet.

    Someone go invent an x-ray connection, or something.

    1. Re:Anywhere in the world. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it might give freenet a near-usable speed.

    2. Re:Anywhere in the world. by tgd · · Score: 4, Funny

      Someone go invent an x-ray connection, or something.

      I think the governments will see right through that plan.

  29. Re:Whoa! You mean gigabit in my home? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please get your sarcasm-meter changed, it appears that the results of parent post did not register properly

  30. Does that mean picosecond pings? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is that not going to cost the consumer more?

    Six months from now I'll probably need one of those scratched fiber switches right in my living room just to keep up with all the other ppl on Counterstrike.

  31. error-free? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So is that error-free as in, a lot fewer dropped packets via pixie dust, or error-free as in it's so fast that you don't notice the dropped packets? I have a feeling if lightning hits the "magic glass" router, it will still screw up just like the current ones do when lightning hits them.

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:error-free? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glass is an insulator. It does not conduct electricity. Even were lightning to hit the ground where the glass is buried, nothing will happen to the light traveling inside the glass.

    2. Re:error-free? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a feeling if lightning hits the "magic glass" router, it will still screw up just like the current ones do when lightning hits them.

      Actually, since lightning is umm... light... You just get a 600x increase in spam-email-significance. Thus you can actually enlarge your privates by atleast 600000%.

    3. Re:error-free? by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      Error-free as in "we demultiplexed a 640Gbit/s signal to 10Gbit/s without destroying it", error free as in "we didn't overclock this chip so far that it's unstable", rather than error free as in "we designed this new physical layer that guarantees that no packet will be interfered with on its way to its destination"

  32. Switching weakest link? by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately the article is a bit low on details and even on their site I didn't find much info. If I understand well they developed a fast optical switch. But how will this be controlled? And how can this increase fiber optic speeds 100 fold, when fiber throughput is limited anyway by e.g. PMD (polarisation mode dispersion). Does anyone know more about this?

  33. Kudos by rlwhite · · Score: 1

    ...to CUDOS?

  34. Not in the USA by LeoDeSol · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is great for the rest of the world where the technology will be implemented. Here in the States, the mega-elite who stand to lose billions if they lose control of the throttled internet will suppress this somehow. America, the most powerful throttled (health care and internet) country in the world.

  35. How it works (I think) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    A conventional electronics packet switch is a store-and-forward device. It receives (at least the header parts of) a given packet, stores the data, decodes it, decides what outgoing ports the packet needs to be re-transmitted upon, composes a new header part, and re-transmits the entire packet on the outgoing port. This means that the packet itself must be buffered, and there is necessarily an overhead latency of many bits (at least the length of the header of the packet) between the input bitstream and the output bitstream.

    In an optical switch, the optical data is split, so that a duplicate optical pattern goes down two paths simultaneously. One path is basically a many-turns coil of optical fibre, so that it will take a few picoseconds for the carrier-light to transit the length of this coil.

    The other optical path goes immediately into a detector and optical logic switcher (if I may coin a new term, "optonics", if you will indulge me), so that the header information is decoded and an optical switch is set to the correct output leg, and a new header is composed and transmitted, just in time for the slightly-delayed carrier-light of the main bulk of the packet to arrive from out of the coiled length and be appended to the outgoing header.

    The technology requires fine-tuning of the length of the coil of optical fibre to match the switching latency of the header/decoder/re-generator part.

    The entire latency of the packet's transit through the entire optical switch is of the order of one sixtieth of the latency of the highest-performance conventional electronics switches.

    Neat innovative new technology brought to you from Oz. Now that is really going to surprise a few arrogant yanks when they eventually figure it out, is it not?

    1. Re:How it works (I think) by quitte · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

  36. I corrected your typo. by kimvette · · Score: 2, Funny

    I corrected the typo in this summary. See following:

    "Researchers at the University of Sydney have developed technology that could boost the throughput of existing networks by 100-fold without costing the provider any more, but consumers can expect to continue to deal with unpublished usage caps and limited bandwidth. It is all thanks to a scratch on a piece of glass. After four years of development, University of Sydney scientists say the Internet is set to become on average 60 times faster than existing networks. According to the Centre for Ultra-high bandwidth Devices for Optical Systems (CUDOS) at the University's School of Physics, the scratch will mean almost instantaneous, error-free and unlimited access to the Internet anywhere in the world."

    Oh, and addition to the obvious typo in the article, I fixed an incorrect its/it's situation.

    But seriously - when have advances in the internet infrastructure benefited the customer's bottom line in recent years? As it is fibre is supposed to be available to every address in the US but the telcos pocketed the grants and fees without providing what they were contractually obligated to -- AND consumer costs have increased.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  37. But don't their Killer NICs fix that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Throughput != Latency

    It has always amused me how commonly businesses play fast and loose with the meaning of the word 'speed' when it comes to internet connections. Yes, higher bandwidth will result in a 'faster' internet experience, but the data is not actually getting to you any faster - you're simply getting more of it at a time, so the webpage/download whatever completes in s shorter space of time.

    You can drive faster than a truck, but if you're delivering more than your vehicle can carry, that slow ass truck is still going to complete the delivery in less time.

    Argh, pet peeve, bad car analogy and all, brought about by years of listening to online gamers brag about how they've got the fastest connection and then crying when it makes no difference to thier gaming experience.

    Anyway, the article is a bit light on details - can't quite make out if they're talking about increased bandwidth or increasing routing efficiency.

    cause, you know, they've got a fan and plastic shrouding - sort of like red paint makes a car go faster.

  38. This is old news by rufey · · Score: 4, Informative

    This has been around since at least October 2005. A slightly better article that contains a little more information (albeit its still kinda vauge) is here

    1. Re:This is old news by thelamecamel · · Score: 1

      This news is not the invention of the photonic chip. The photonic chip has not been around since 2005, it is not around now, and will not be around for some time. And at a conference this week, some were arguing that a digital photonic chip will never be around in a way competitive to electronics, at least with our current internet protocols. The photonic chip is a long term goal, which incorporates most of CUDOS's research, but the advance announced here would be one small component of the chip (or useful on its own)

      The news here is that people in Denmark/China have demultiplexed a 640Gbps signal (too fast for electronics to handle) into one of its constituent 10Gbps signals (which is manageable by electronics), using one of our chalcogenide waveguides. I think the previous record was 160Gbps by CUDOS last year.

      This advance is at the laboratory stage - I think the experiments weren't done in Australia because we don't have a 640Gbps source, so don't expect all telcos to switch over to this technology today - but hopefully in time this will be put to use in the fibre backbone.

  39. Zardoz! by Sabathius · · Score: 1

    It's the Tabernacle from Zardoz!

  40. Yes but by wtansill · · Score: 1

    All that means is that you'll hit your monthly caps in three days instead of four...

    --
    The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
  41. TFA? by denzacar · · Score: 4, Informative

    I am guessing that it is all still a bit secrety, but basically the technology will allow optical network switches instead of electronical.
    Optical circuits.

    "The scratched glass we've developed is actually a photonic integrated circuit," Eggleton said.

    "This circuit uses the 'scratch' as a guide or a switching path for information - like when trains are switched from one track to another - except this switch takes only one picosecond to change tracks. This means that in one second the switch is turning on and off about one million times. We are talking about photonic technology that has terabit per second capacity."

    An initial demonstration proved it possible to achieve speeds 60 times faster than existing local networks.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  42. Can I get some.... by xalorous · · Score: 1

    almost instantaneous, error-free and unlimited access to the Internet anywhere in the world

    of what this guy's smokin?

    --
    TANSTAAFL GIGO Acronyms to live by!
    1. Re:Can I get some.... by argent · · Score: 1

      It's electricity^Winternet that's too cheap to meter!

      Oh, wait, I already have that.

  43. old news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure that I'm missing something really important, but I seem to remember Agilent Technologies announced a photonic switch all the way back in Y2K...

  44. Guess they don't eat by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 1

    their own dog food, took my browser over 3 minutes to load Techworlds page.

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
    1. Re:Guess they don't eat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think a publication called "Techworld" does research?

  45. I, for one, welcome our nano-augmented overlords. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I see that the Aquinas Protocol is finally about to be in place.

  46. Photonic? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    I'm a doctor, not an ISP.

  47. Slowing down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darn, the technology's moving backwards In 2005 they promised 1000 times the bandwidth.

    http://www.scienceinpublic.com/2005/cudos.htm

  48. A good car-analogy by mi · · Score: 1

    Argh, pet peeve, bad car analogy and all

    Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.

    --Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1996).

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  49. Paper still vague, but sounds like TDM by Animats · · Score: 1

    It sounds like they're is bit-interleaving multiple data streams onto one faster data stream. It's bit-level time-division multiplexing, like the 16 voice channels on a T1 line. That's useful for pumping more data through expensive long-haul fibers like undersea cables, and thus a good project for Australia. It's a better way to make a big pipe, but it doesn't do anything for switching and routing.

    There's interest in building a pure photonic router, but this isn't it. Not yet.

    1. Re:Paper still vague, but sounds like TDM by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      It's a better way to make a big pipe, but it doesn't do anything for switching and routing.

      Of course it does. Data in our current infrastructure is already multiplexed using packets. Sooner or later that multiplexed data is going to go to other locations. This is where your packet switch come to play. Until this time there wasn't a switch fast enough to handle this level of multiplexing. This is because current switches use old fashioned electronics to do the switching. By developing a photon based switch they hope to reduce or eliminate the switching as the bottleneck.

      Please note: networks and optics are not my areas of expertise. Please forgive me for any mistakes I have made.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    2. Re:Paper still vague, but sounds like TDM by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      This article (pdf) has a good explanation of what I think they are aiming for. It even explains why it will be error free.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    3. Re:Paper still vague, but sounds like TDM by Animats · · Score: 1

      By developing a photon based switch they hope to reduce or eliminate the switching as the bottleneck.

      They don't seem to be developing a true photon-based switch, just a dumb multiplexer. A real photonic router would be much more complicated. Luxcore made claims in that direction, but their web site is now a parking page. There are some "photonic switches", but they're mostly either reconfigurable circuit switches using MEMS mirrors, or fan-out devices that don't have any packet storage. There are pure optical storage devices (mostly delay lines, but some RAM-like devices), so we're getting closer.

  50. well, pretty spiffy and so on... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ...but to take advantage of this, doesn't it mean that the ultimate end user and wherever they are connecting to both need to be on optical networks, end to end? Like, how much difference would this be anyway on my copper dialup connection, or even folks on copper dsl or copper cable? Will my modern full bloat AJAX page I am trying to view go from a minute and half to kinda sorta almost load, to a minute and 29.999999 seconds instead? And my ISP bill and phone line bill go up several bucks apiece to achieve such a "new speed increase"?

  51. This is nothing new! by WizADSL · · Score: 1

    I have photonic switches all over my home and office!

  52. CmoCast not withstanding, there were errors in by crovira · · Score: 1

    the article which made me ask myself if the author and/or the editor knew WTF the press release was about.

    Come back when you've learned the difference between nano (millionth) and pico (billionth or 1,000th of a millionth.)

    This is the problem when 'soit disant' journalists aren't.

    I'll believe a hacker any day before a journalist who can't get the facts straight.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  53. Hey they've slowed photons down to ...STOP... so by crovira · · Score: 1

    that statement has to be qualified.

    300,000 KPS in a vacuum or...

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  54. I have been experimenting with this by bitsiphon · · Score: 1

    I have tested this on my car. I scratched my windshield and now can Photonic Drive. My car is not any faster but when the light hits the scratches its very groovy in a photonic way...

  55. Not with the likes of Verizon and Comcast. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    ... without costing the consumer any more

    Oh ... I think it will cost the consumer more. A lot more.

    At least here in the U.S. I'm sure our Asian friends will enjoy their new hundred gigabit connections.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  56. Well... by the_olo · · Score: 1

    ...CUDOS goes to them.