interestingly, light runs through glass fibre at about 1/2 the speed of light in a vaccuum. so while it's still insanely fast, and the speed of light, that's an arbitrary number based on the materials involved!:)
using NxGbit ethernet to seriously overprovision as well as using good QoS features can get you pretty close to ATM levels of service.
My employer streams television feed over ethernet for many locations, and we haven't had any problems with delivery or performance. as you said, it's all about carefully engineering your solutions, and not relying on cisco^H^H^H^H^H proprietary protocols to do the work for you.
Firewire has yet to impress me; I'm not sure where the future of that product is going, if there is one. since apple decided to jack up the licensing costs on the firewire technology, most manufacturers aren't adding firewire due to the roughly 1 USD it adds per board. that's a lot for a manufacturer to spend on something (compared to an open standard w/o licensing fees.)
a working digital ubiquitous device interconnect probably won't happen for a while, sadly. god forbid the consumer get something cool and cheap that works:)
1.) 802.11b isn't all that fast, although in Japan they can take it faster than 11 mbit (there are 22mbit cards, and Harris has a 54mbit card on the way. 802.11a I believe, for that one.)
2.) even with using something like triple-DES, etc I can't imagine that your wireless network would be anywhere as secure as a hardwired fibre setup. Can't you see the little japanese script kiddies sitting outside the fence, trying to hack in to the wireless network with their super-cool-released-only-in-japan laptops?
3.) number 2 would be fun to bring your palmtop/handheld with you! hehe.
Switches? VLANs? do you have a clue?
on
Tokyo.Disney.Net
·
· Score: 2
you could (god knows why) put hotel network devices on the same network infrastructure if you desired. that's what VLANs are for. a port based (layer 2) VLAN has no ability to speak to other layer 2 VLANs on the same switch unless you have it configured to do so (inter-VLAN routing on all the higher end switching routers.)
as long as you're content with the segmentation capabilities of your switching equipment, there's no security faults with this approach.
that being said, it's still kind of a bad idea. I'm sure they've got some tie-ins there, of course.
While I appreciate humourous comments quite a bit, technically clueless comments drive me bonkers.
I'm sure somewhere there's someone like Dug Song laughing at my pathetic ass anyhow:)
Well, with equipment like Extreme Networks, Foundry networks, etc you will be able to swap out your old 1Gbit GBICs for new 10Gbit GBICs relatively soon.
Yummy... G4 driven switching routers with 480Gbit backplanes.
the dalnet one was slightly humourous, but this just isn't funny. the last bastion of quality operating systemness around, bought by AOL? not only is it rather impossible but it's just not funny. bleh.
now if you guys had gone in with Tom Pabst and falsified some Microsoft/AOL secret merger plans, that would have cracked my ass.
Interix was a product called OpenNT created by Softways; MS bought them and their technology years back. I remember using OpenNT on NT4 when it came out and it was killer.
I still have a demo copy of it from 1996 or so. it was really cool, but MS has leveraged it as a way to help people migrate from unix to NT, rather than as a way to help make NT boxen useful. that's life when a huge corporation has unlimited money to crush opponents:)
You put in fake movie titles, some names, some vague theories and allusions, and give the program a length in paragraphs.
Out pops another quality Katz movie review. other than some of the less-than-coherent phrasing, it's not unlike his other work:)
this whole april fool's thing is getting old though guys... been watching you at it throughout the years, you need to pick up the pace a bit. might I suggest a scoop on VA Linux turning a profit? there's an april fool's joke I'd like to laugh at!
I personally have no interest in seeing FreeBSD turn into linux. a pretty graphical operating system full of useless kludgy apps written by preschoolers doesn't fulfill my needs, so why go there?
that being said, I make my decisions with my pocketbook and not with words. do you actively fund or assist with these types of projects? I push my employer to give, and also to allow us to give code back to the community.
It's very silly for me to say this, I realize, but I'd still prefer to make the initial barrier a *little* steeper to help weed out the people who wouldn't make good future coworkers/employees/whatever:P
I can't speak for others but I know that I use FreeBSD on laptops for the tools that it makes available to me. I also use win2k advanced server, but that still doesn't provide everything i need, even with third party (and costly, i might add) tools.
my pentium 3 based laptop has that speedstep nonsense in it, which works decently. of course modifying processor speed in laptops is nothing new, so I fail to see why intel pushes it as some kind of fascinating addition, but it works nonetheless.
as far as APM, that works, especially on my vaio- things spin down, backlight dims, goes off, etc. this is of course a bios function as you say, but then again so is ACPI, so the analogy fails somewhat. for my wintel laptop usage I've always turned off power management and just made an effort to plan things accordingly, but then again I probably use my laptops for different reasons than you do (which also helps explain why I use a unix based laptop solution.)
So just remember, while you're busy surfing the web or watching a dvd or whatever at the airport, I'll be the one with the tiny little unix box sniffing your 802.11b traffic and reading all your email:)
I love freebsd on my laptops, but to say the support is great is kind of stretching it. support is great without using any cardbus devices, which limits perfomance for things like usb/high speed serial/scsi/network etc... not all that bad, since these are laptops after all, but still.
I know everyone is eagerly awaiting 5.0 to approach a more stable level; quite a few folks on the freebsd-mobile list are running it with great success for some cardbus devices.
all that being said, support for non-cardbus PCMCIA devices is very good, and seems a bit more stable than linux ever was with that. that might have something to do with all those linux distros putting stuff everywhere and never being able to know which libs went where, etc. how infuriating is that?
I personally have always found text mode installs a lot easier, whether I knew what I was doing or not. I'm not fond of graphical install tools, and I would hate to see freebsd devolve to that level of usage.
that being said, maybe a slightly nicer way to choose the 80000000 prepackaged apps would be good, since not everyone enjoys spending a day making ports on a large scale to plug the holes.
either that, or maybe I should stick to installing stable, and avoid the bleeding edge. hehehe.
are you familiar at ALL with the work that theo has done with netBSD/OpenBSD? almost all of that code was (originally) written for sun/m68k/vax boxes, and he's got a pile of suns in his house. why would it be surprising for him to leave solaris on some of them? or decide to use that as a platform? he's definitely an odd duck but don't act like netcraft results somehow prove a secret lust for sun software:)
Don't forget that OSPF kicks ass, and other IGP implementations that are proprietary suck:)
Nothing is more frustrating than trying to design a large network when you run across a cisco bigot who insists that (E)IGRP and ISL vlan's are the way to go. bleh.
It strikes me as a little strange to pay for software that others have developed, but they are free to do that, whether we think it's right or wrong.
However, they're definitely in the right to ask for people to "donate" more or less for the server space/power usage/bandwidth usage that your ISO downloads take up. ISO's are not bandwidth or server friendly!
That wouldn't help at all- I'm not talking about listening in, or whatever... It's relatively easy to filter out any consistent 60Hz noise, and the like.
That being said, I suppose if I had my maxwell smart whisperphone booth it would be even more safe, right?
It's very, very easy to tap your neighbors phones.
a lineman's handset will work in any situation, and in an apt building you can just tap your neighbor's phone wires in the walls and wire a jack or what have you:)
I agree completely. I try to peg my connection as much as possible, to use all that B/W I'm paying for. I'd love to have a cached proxy for movies or TV content on my local cable network, because then I wouldn't be hitting their internet pipe but I'd still be getting my content fast.
I guess all I really have to say is that if people are going to have this kind of connectivity, then there's going to be a serious necessity for a major upgrade of all the infrastructure equipment to handle the potential increased traffic.
anyone who has been using the net since the early 90s or so can attest that while speeds have increased, overall latency seems to have grown as well... or maybe that's just false objectivity, looking back!
Actually, I was meaning downloading, not watching. In respect to download speeds, if everyone had uncapped cable connections, that kind of traffic (bursty random high speed sessions) would really make it difficult to keep a quality level of service. HTTP traffic is typically a lot easier to manage, as well as being able to cache and control. but hey, YMMV:)
Actually, most of the large cable (and dialup/DSL) ISPs out there are already using large transparent squid boxes already. I know that @home does, and I believe that RR might, although I haven't been able to verify that. (Anyone?)
I definitely think you're right about technology- having to work with RBOCs and LECs on a daily basis, I can absolutely attest that they sit on their duffs while cheaper more accessible technology sits unused. However, most of the people trying to fight the incumbents have gotten the shaft (covad, independent phone companies, etc.)
The real money seems to be in not fighting them on their home turf, but finding niches where the larger companies don't want to go- quality rural cell phone access, for example. There are quite a few good people working on this in the dakotas and the like.
While that was a tangent, it also applies to cable modems, DSL, etc- it's important to keep in mind that large business interests are fighting to keep the underdog down. help keep up the fight by deciding with your pocketbook. bandwidth isn't free, and neither is choice!
Consider that regardless of how fast your connection is on the cable network, you still have a limited pipe to the internet. I wouldn't dream of giving end users 38Mbit connections a piece- that would just pound on whatever connection I had, be it an OC-48 or OC-192, even.
It's the kind of thing where "if you build it, they will come"... someone develops an app like napster for movie trading on a large scale, (that actually works well!) with all these kiddies sitting on huge fat pipes and the whole internet turns to shit instantly. napster was bad enough. just deal with having connections NOW that most of the world can only dream of:P
Do you realize the possibilities for extreme invasion of privacy possible if you're sitting on a network with your neighbours? regardless of a switch or not, it's not that difficult sniff a switch any more than a hub (albeit a tad more time consuming.)
especially that cheapo low end cisco stuff. like a knife through butter.
would you like your neighbours having complete logs of your IRC/AIM/ICQ/etc sessions? how about capturing all your email? complete histories of all your web surfing, as well as any information entered into those websites?
Creepy, creepy stuff. I personally prefer having my connection hit equipment farther upstream, even with having to live with lower connection speeds. with a nationwide network, script kiddies who can type "ethereal" or "tcpdump" etc will have way too much power for their own good:/
Slashdot Mirror
interestingly, light runs through glass fibre at about 1/2 the speed of light in a vaccuum. so while it's still insanely fast, and the speed of light, that's an arbitrary number based on the materials involved! :)
using NxGbit ethernet to seriously overprovision as well as using good QoS features can get you pretty close to ATM levels of service.
:)
My employer streams television feed over ethernet for many locations, and we haven't had any problems with delivery or performance. as you said, it's all about carefully engineering your solutions, and not relying on cisco^H^H^H^H^H proprietary protocols to do the work for you.
Firewire has yet to impress me; I'm not sure where the future of that product is going, if there is one. since apple decided to jack up the licensing costs on the firewire technology, most manufacturers aren't adding firewire due to the roughly 1 USD it adds per board. that's a lot for a manufacturer to spend on something (compared to an open standard w/o licensing fees.)
a working digital ubiquitous device interconnect probably won't happen for a while, sadly. god forbid the consumer get something cool and cheap that works
forget rides at disneyland, how about the US Navy's AEGIS cruisers being controlled by NT? it's a reality now :)
1.) 802.11b isn't all that fast, although in Japan they can take it faster than 11 mbit (there are 22mbit cards, and Harris has a 54mbit card on the way. 802.11a I believe, for that one.)
2.) even with using something like triple-DES, etc I can't imagine that your wireless network would be anywhere as secure as a hardwired fibre setup. Can't you see the little japanese script kiddies sitting outside the fence, trying to hack in to the wireless network with their super-cool-released-only-in-japan laptops?
3.) number 2 would be fun to bring your palmtop/handheld with you! hehe.
you could (god knows why) put hotel network devices on the same network infrastructure if you desired. that's what VLANs are for. a port based (layer 2) VLAN has no ability to speak to other layer 2 VLANs on the same switch unless you have it configured to do so (inter-VLAN routing on all the higher end switching routers.)
:)
as long as you're content with the segmentation capabilities of your switching equipment, there's no security faults with this approach.
that being said, it's still kind of a bad idea. I'm sure they've got some tie-ins there, of course.
While I appreciate humourous comments quite a bit, technically clueless comments drive me bonkers.
I'm sure somewhere there's someone like Dug Song laughing at my pathetic ass anyhow
Well, with equipment like Extreme Networks, Foundry networks, etc you will be able to swap out your old 1Gbit GBICs for new 10Gbit GBICs relatively soon.
:P
Yummy... G4 driven switching routers with 480Gbit backplanes.
what's that spanking sound? oh, that's right. It's cisco getting whooped
the dalnet one was slightly humourous, but this just isn't funny. the last bastion of quality operating systemness around, bought by AOL? not only is it rather impossible but it's just not funny. bleh.
now if you guys had gone in with Tom Pabst and falsified some Microsoft/AOL secret merger plans, that would have cracked my ass.
Interix was a product called OpenNT created by Softways; MS bought them and their technology years back. I remember using OpenNT on NT4 when it came out and it was killer.
:)
I still have a demo copy of it from 1996 or so. it was really cool, but MS has leveraged it as a way to help people migrate from unix to NT, rather than as a way to help make NT boxen useful. that's life when a huge corporation has unlimited money to crush opponents
You put in fake movie titles, some names, some vague theories and allusions, and give the program a length in paragraphs.
:)
Out pops another quality Katz movie review. other than some of the less-than-coherent phrasing, it's not unlike his other work
this whole april fool's thing is getting old though guys... been watching you at it throughout the years, you need to pick up the pace a bit. might I suggest a scoop on VA Linux turning a profit? there's an april fool's joke I'd like to laugh at!
I personally have no interest in seeing FreeBSD turn into linux. a pretty graphical operating system full of useless kludgy apps written by preschoolers doesn't fulfill my needs, so why go there?
:P
that being said, I make my decisions with my pocketbook and not with words. do you actively fund or assist with these types of projects? I push my employer to give, and also to allow us to give code back to the community.
It's very silly for me to say this, I realize, but I'd still prefer to make the initial barrier a *little* steeper to help weed out the people who wouldn't make good future coworkers/employees/whatever
I can't speak for others but I know that I use FreeBSD on laptops for the tools that it makes available to me. I also use win2k advanced server, but that still doesn't provide everything i need, even with third party (and costly, i might add) tools.
:)
my pentium 3 based laptop has that speedstep nonsense in it, which works decently. of course modifying processor speed in laptops is nothing new, so I fail to see why intel pushes it as some kind of fascinating addition, but it works nonetheless.
as far as APM, that works, especially on my vaio- things spin down, backlight dims, goes off, etc. this is of course a bios function as you say, but then again so is ACPI, so the analogy fails somewhat. for my wintel laptop usage I've always turned off power management and just made an effort to plan things accordingly, but then again I probably use my laptops for different reasons than you do (which also helps explain why I use a unix based laptop solution.)
So just remember, while you're busy surfing the web or watching a dvd or whatever at the airport, I'll be the one with the tiny little unix box sniffing your 802.11b traffic and reading all your email
*COUGH*COUGH*SINGAPORE*
I love freebsd on my laptops, but to say the support is great is kind of stretching it. support is great without using any cardbus devices, which limits perfomance for things like usb/high speed serial/scsi/network etc... not all that bad, since these are laptops after all, but still.
I know everyone is eagerly awaiting 5.0 to approach a more stable level; quite a few folks on the freebsd-mobile list are running it with great success for some cardbus devices.
all that being said, support for non-cardbus PCMCIA devices is very good, and seems a bit more stable than linux ever was with that. that might have something to do with all those linux distros putting stuff everywhere and never being able to know which libs went where, etc. how infuriating is that?
I personally have always found text mode installs a lot easier, whether I knew what I was doing or not. I'm not fond of graphical install tools, and I would hate to see freebsd devolve to that level of usage.
that being said, maybe a slightly nicer way to choose the 80000000 prepackaged apps would be good, since not everyone enjoys spending a day making ports on a large scale to plug the holes.
either that, or maybe I should stick to installing stable, and avoid the bleeding edge. hehehe.
are you retarded?
:)
are you familiar at ALL with the work that theo has done with netBSD/OpenBSD? almost all of that code was (originally) written for sun/m68k/vax boxes, and he's got a pile of suns in his house. why would it be surprising for him to leave solaris on some of them? or decide to use that as a platform? he's definitely an odd duck but don't act like netcraft results somehow prove a secret lust for sun software
when will people learn that FreeBSD scales, while open sits there picking it's nose?
:)
all of those admittedly nice security features don't help much when you can't drop 8 procs into a box and make it work
Don't forget that OSPF kicks ass, and other IGP implementations that are proprietary suck :)
Nothing is more frustrating than trying to design a large network when you run across a cisco bigot who insists that (E)IGRP and ISL vlan's are the way to go. bleh.
It strikes me as a little strange to pay for software that others have developed, but they are free to do that, whether we think it's right or wrong.
However, they're definitely in the right to ask for people to "donate" more or less for the server space/power usage/bandwidth usage that your ISO downloads take up. ISO's are not bandwidth or server friendly!
That wouldn't help at all- I'm not talking about listening in, or whatever... It's relatively easy to filter out any consistent 60Hz noise, and the like.
That being said, I suppose if I had my maxwell smart whisperphone booth it would be even more safe, right?
It's very, very easy to tap your neighbors phones.
:)
a lineman's handset will work in any situation, and in an apt building you can just tap your neighbor's phone wires in the walls and wire a jack or what have you
I agree completely. I try to peg my connection as much as possible, to use all that B/W I'm paying for. I'd love to have a cached proxy for movies or TV content on my local cable network, because then I wouldn't be hitting their internet pipe but I'd still be getting my content fast.
I guess all I really have to say is that if people are going to have this kind of connectivity, then there's going to be a serious necessity for a major upgrade of all the infrastructure equipment to handle the potential increased traffic.
anyone who has been using the net since the early 90s or so can attest that while speeds have increased, overall latency seems to have grown as well... or maybe that's just false objectivity, looking back!
Actually, I was meaning downloading, not watching. In respect to download speeds, if everyone had uncapped cable connections, that kind of traffic (bursty random high speed sessions) would really make it difficult to keep a quality level of service. HTTP traffic is typically a lot easier to manage, as well as being able to cache and control. but hey, YMMV :)
Actually, most of the large cable (and dialup/DSL) ISPs out there are already using large transparent squid boxes already. I know that @home does, and I believe that RR might, although I haven't been able to verify that. (Anyone?)
I definitely think you're right about technology- having to work with RBOCs and LECs on a daily basis, I can absolutely attest that they sit on their duffs while cheaper more accessible technology sits unused. However, most of the people trying to fight the incumbents have gotten the shaft (covad, independent phone companies, etc.)
The real money seems to be in not fighting them on their home turf, but finding niches where the larger companies don't want to go- quality rural cell phone access, for example. There are quite a few good people working on this in the dakotas and the like.
While that was a tangent, it also applies to cable modems, DSL, etc- it's important to keep in mind that large business interests are fighting to keep the underdog down. help keep up the fight by deciding with your pocketbook. bandwidth isn't free, and neither is choice!
well, I can troll too :) just not today, unless you're a cisco bigot, then maybe you'd have an issue with me... hehehe.
Consider that regardless of how fast your connection is on the cable network, you still have a limited pipe to the internet. I wouldn't dream of giving end users 38Mbit connections a piece- that would just pound on whatever connection I had, be it an OC-48 or OC-192, even.
:P
It's the kind of thing where "if you build it, they will come"... someone develops an app like napster for movie trading on a large scale, (that actually works well!) with all these kiddies sitting on huge fat pipes and the whole internet turns to shit instantly. napster was bad enough. just deal with having connections NOW that most of the world can only dream of
Do you realize the possibilities for extreme invasion of privacy possible if you're sitting on a network with your neighbours? regardless of a switch or not, it's not that difficult sniff a switch any more than a hub (albeit a tad more time consuming.)
:/
especially that cheapo low end cisco stuff. like a knife through butter.
would you like your neighbours having complete logs of your IRC/AIM/ICQ/etc sessions? how about capturing all your email? complete histories of all your web surfing, as well as any information entered into those websites?
Creepy, creepy stuff. I personally prefer having my connection hit equipment farther upstream, even with having to live with lower connection speeds. with a nationwide network, script kiddies who can type "ethereal" or "tcpdump" etc will have way too much power for their own good