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."

13 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. 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 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?

    3. 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.

  3. 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
  4. 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.

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

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

  6. 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.
  7. 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