Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

100-Petabit Internet Backbone Coming Into View

Posted by kdawson on from the movies-on-whim dept.

lostinbrave notes laboratory work that could lead to long-haul network cables capable of exceeding 100 Petabits per second.kilometer. "Alcatel-Lucent said that scientists at Bell Labs have set an optical transmission record that could deliver data about 10 times faster than current undersea cables, resulting in speeds of more than 100 Petabits per second.kilometer. This translates to the equivalent of about 100 million Gigabits per second.kilometer, or sending about 400 DVDs per second over 7,000 kilometers, roughly the distance between Paris and Chicago. ... The transmissions were not just faster, they were accomplished over a network whose repeaters are 20 percent farther apart than commonly maintained in such networks, which could decrease the costs of deploying such a network."

30 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. Blu-Ray by daybot · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...or sending about 400 DVDs per second

    That's just about enough to cope with today's worldwide porn output, but what happens when the industry switches to Blu-Ray?

    1. Re:Blu-Ray by 0110011001110101 · · Score: 5, Funny
      >>Why not put that money into a decent wardrobe and haircut, and you know, actually socialize and get a girlfriend or boyfriend?

      umm, so to be clear... will this girlfriend or boyfriend help me find more porn??

      --
      Don't anthropomorphize computers: they hate that.
  2. Too bad by Spazztastic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Too bad nobody in the USA will ever get that. Even if we were to get a connection that fast, it would have a 20GB/mo cap so the second you stream one HD flick on Netflix, your cap is filled and you're stuck at a measly 768kbit/sec down until the first of the month.

    --
    Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    1. Re:Too bad by Idiomatick · · Score: 2, Informative

      I really don't think this was intended for end users. You could have all media saved on computers over the course of a week. Whining that you wont get that seems extreme. Also I doubt HD vids on netflick are 20gigs.

    2. Re:Too bad by thesandtiger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree - the fraction I'd be happy with would be 9/10ths. Totally reasonable!

      Being serious, this is only indirectly for end users, and people bitching about slow connections here would be like me bitching in a NASA thread about how it isn't fair that NASA has crafts going 20,000 MPH while my bicycle is still stuck at a max of about 30mph. Different toys for different uses. This is clearly an infrastructure tool, one that offers much better speeds and lower costs of deployment than the current stuff.

      That said, I'd really be happy if I could just get FIOS where I live. It is absurd to me that, living in downtown Chicago, I can't get anything better than Comcast cable.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    3. Re:Too bad by aynoknman · · Score: 2, Funny

      people bitching about slow connections here would be like me bitching in a NASA thread about how it isn't fair that NASA has crafts going 20,000 MPH while my bicycle is still stuck at a max of about 30mph.

      Don't know about you, but I want to go to the grocery story at 20,000 MPH, and be able to bring back a container full of stuff too!

      --
      We need a "+1 -- nice sig" moderation.
    4. Re:Too bad by nacturation · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't know about you, but I want to go to the grocery story at 20,000 MPH, and be able to bring back a container full of stuff too!

      If you live so far from the grocery store you need a 20,000 MPH craft to get there, it's time to start growing your own.

      Do you know where one can purchase grocery store seeds?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  3. second.kilometer by Paul+Rose · · Score: 5, Informative
    Maybe old hat to you network engineers, but I was previously unfamiliar with "bits per second.kilometer".
    From the PC World article:

    The measurement takes into account both speed and the ability to maintain it over distance, by multiplying the network's speed by its distance in kilometers. In this case, a network with an aggregate speed of 15.5T bits per second (Tbps) was able to maintain that speed over a distance of 7,000 kilometers (4,349 miles), or roughly the distance from Paris to Chicago

    1. Re:second.kilometer by dsginter · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe old hat to you network engineers, but I was previously unfamiliar with "bits per second.kilometer".

      This is equivalent to 43 LoC/HI (Libraries of Congress per hour-inch).

      --
      More
    2. Re:second.kilometer by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 2, Funny

      c mol / LoC m = (3x10^9 m/s) mol / (10 TB) m = 0.00003 mol / byte s. I'm at a loss for how to interpret this dimensional measure. Maybe it has something to do with the number of monkeys needed to type the works of Shakespeare in a specified amount of time.

    3. Re:second.kilometer by Megane · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What I want to know is how many bits there are in the first.kilometer and the third.kilometer.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    4. Re:second.kilometer by jgs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe old hat to you network engineers, but I was previously unfamiliar with "bits per second.kilometer".

      Thanks for the info. No, this is not old hat to network engineers. I've never heard of it and I've been working in the industry for more years than I care to admit. I think it might be old hat to marketing people though, since it appears to be a classic BIG MARKETING NUMBER. Normal networking people would call 15.5 Tbps * 7000 km... 15.5 Tbps.

      Maybe it's true that optics geeks really do use numbers this way, I dunno. But the fact it comes from an AlcaLu press release doesn't lend it a whole lot of credibility.

      I am massively unimpressed by the headline on the Slashdot story. Maybe another article headlined "kdawson swallows inflated AlcaLu marketing fluff hook, line and sinker" would be in order?

    5. Re:second.kilometer by sharkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can you convert that to rods and hogsheads please? I'm a little lost.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    6. Re:second.kilometer by Rising+Ape · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Given that optical fibre capacity is limited by dispersion (different parts of the signal travelling at different speeds, causing adjacent symbols to overlap), it's a reasonable number - both a longer distance and a faster symbol rate make the problem worse. So if this is what's limiting you, you can double the distance by halving the speed, or vice versa. Of course, that's not the only limiting factor, and IIRC some forms of dispersion don't scale proportionally with distance, so it's not the only relevant factor.

    7. Re:second.kilometer by alx5000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I thought it was quite common to express the capacity of an optical system by its bandwidth-distance product... Or are we talking about something different here?

      --
      My 0.02 cents
    8. Re:second.kilometer by jgs · · Score: 2, Informative

      At the very least I assume we can agree that "100-Petabit Internet Backbone" is a gross misrepresentation of what the press release describes. "15.5 Tbit long haul" would have been accurate.

    9. Re:second.kilometer by jgs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, the story headline is talking about something totally different. I mean, how do YOU read "100-Petabit Internet Backbone"? Most people would not interpret it to mean "15.5 Tbps delivered over 7000 km." (The headline error is repeated in TFA. Ironically if you click all the way through to the AlcaLu press release the headline is more accurate: "Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs announces new optical transmission record and breaks 100 Petabit per second kilometer barrier".)

      I will grant you that optics geeks may find the bandwidth-distance metric familiar... but I continue to assert that [Inter]net geeks do not.

  4. Who cares, solve the last mile already. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would trade this in a second for a guarantee that the last mile problem will be resolved in my lifetime.

    It's been 10 years and I'm still stuck with a crappy 1.5m/256k (1.2/180 actual) ADSL line.

    --
    The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    1. Re:Who cares, solve the last mile already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I know in my area in PA, we have the same options you list above. The only one missing is the Fibre-to-the-home... but that can be had in the Pittsburgh, PA area via Verizon's FIOS. I know here in the middle of PA with comcast's cable modem I get around 14Mbits/sec down and about 3Mbit/sec up.

    2. Re:Who cares, solve the last mile already. by RealGrouchy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, you can solve about 38% of the "last mile" problem if you switched to metric. Then you'd only have to worry about the last kilometre.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  5. Will we notice? by maggotsforbreakfast · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does anyone know what percentage of our current trans-atlantic bandwidth we are using? The full article says that we currently have 10 Petabits/s*k, so this would be about a 10x increase. Thats a lot, but less then I thought.

    1. Re:Will we notice? by Niksko · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think I read that only 10% of undersea cable capacity was/is being used. Can't get you a source, but I remember reading it when I got off on a tangent after the last undersea cable damage.

  6. already have this at home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've had 100-Petabit/decade internet at home for a while now.

    1. Re:already have this at home by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      112589990684262400 (100 petabits)
      10( years)
      12 (months)
      365.25 (days)
      24 (hours)
      60 (minutes)
      60 (seconds)
      ------------
      29731345.93 (bits per second)
      29034.52 (kilobits per second)
      28.35 (megabits per second)

      This new line transfers the equivalent of one decade of fully-saturated domestic ADSL2 line (24Mb) traffic every second.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  7. Re:Confusing units by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, lets see: 12 parsecs per hogs-head/bushel^fortnight = 3 onions.

  8. That faint "thump" you heard in the background by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    That was MPAA chairman Dan Glickman fainting and hitting the floor 'cause nobody cared enough to catch him.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Re:second.kilometer? by gardyloo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yep. Decoherence/absorption/dispersion happens. Packets get dropped.

  10. Conversions? by theJML · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is the US... Can we get this in Libraries of Congress/mile?

    --
    -=JML=-
    1. Re:Conversions? by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative

      I had to substitute 1 LoC for 10 terabyte myself, but according to google 100Pb/s*km = 2863278 LoC*mph. So if you give everyone in Chicago a copy of the library of congress and they drive around at 1 mph, it'll have the same bandwidth. Simple, right?

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  11. Re:and yet by Snowblindeye · · Score: 2, Informative

    All these advances in speed and yet consumer ISPs can't seem to offer more than 6Mbps down and 1.5Mbps up for less than $70 a month.

    Thats because we don't have real competition in the US, so why should they give you more for less?

    Compare this to Germany for example, were you can get 16 Mbps for as little as 15 euros/month, 50 Mbps is available and Kabel Deutschland just announced that they are going to start selling 100 Mbps starting next year . Amazing what competition will do.