Actually, the article said they used raman amplification, not Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers. Raman can be used in either the C-band (1530 to 1565nm - typically where EDFAs are used), or the L-band (1565 - 1625nm). Actually, I think Raman can be used at any point in the spectrum, but don't quote me on that because I am not a physicist!
EDFAs do allow signals to travel long distances, but the problem is that they are "single point" amplifiers. The signal gets attenuated down quite a bit after traveling 50 miles or so and then is boosted back up by the EDFA. The signal to noise ratio has already dropped too low and can't be recovered. So with EDFAs you are limited to a relatively small number of hops (six or so) before it has to be electrically regenerated (detect the signal and then electrically send it to a laser to be retransmitted cleanly).
Raman amplifiers use an effect called Stimulated Raman Scattering that uses the fiber in the ground as the amplifier itself. By using a pump laser transmitted into the fiber (typically opposite to the direction of data flow), the power of the pump laser's low wavelength is transferred in the glass to the higher wavelengths of the data signals. Amplification is then distributed along that 50 miles of fiber or so between pump lasers. The signal power never gets as low with Raman as with EDFAs, so the signal to noise ratio is kept higher. That's how they are able to get much longer distances between electrical regeneration out of these new systems.
I don't know much about SOAs, but I've heard they are not good for multichannel systems. Something about the fact that they are noisy? I think they are good for single channel applications.
This research is great and all, but telecom providers are having enough trouble selling capacity on their existing EDFA systems. Something is going to have to drive a lot of demand for bandwidth before systems like this one from Lucent get deployed.
I wouldn't say that they mapped the CIA's network. Sure, they found some machine names that route mail. Big deal. I'll bet more that half of the slashdotters here could have gotten the same (or more) information. I don't see how knowing what machines route mail pose any security threat. Anyone outside the network could just look at their mail headers and see what internal machines were used to forward the mail.
If someone can get classified information from CIA via social engineering, I'd say someone needs to be retrained. These guys should be on the lookout for that at all times.
Re:I thought SNMP was a security hole...
on
Security Hole In SNMP
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It hasn't worked that way for a long time, but here's what used to happen in some implementations:
- Send an SNMP set or get to a box. Use any ol' random community string.
- The box then sends an SNMP trap to its management station which contained the cleartext real community string.
If you had a packet sniffer, you could easily get the community string. I don't remember offhand if the trap contained the read-only or read-write string, but still, either way, I don't want a device doing that.
That was a long time ago. I can't imagine any devices still have such a hole unless they haven't been upgraded in years.
I had (still have, actually) a Palm V that I once sat on during a meeting. The screen was completely cracked. I called Palm's customer support and told them I needed it to be repaired. They didn't even ask me what was wrong. Apparently, it's a fixed price for repair no matter what happens to it.
If I wored in IT/IS at that company I'd call Palm myself. It's worth a shot.
Another story... A few years ago when I was working at an ISP, they had a beautiful 21-inch monitor that arrived DOA. The distributor they got it from just sent a new one right away and never asked for the other one back. This thing sat in a storeroom for almost a year. I asked about buying it, thinking they would say no, but I was surprised when they agreed to sell it to me for 10% of their cost. So I ended up paying $95 for it -- 1998, so that was a great deal!
I tried to get it repaired at several local TV repair shops, but none said they could fix it. I was starting to think I'd wasted my money, but my wife just called the manufacturer, gave them the serial number and they said, sure it's under warranty, just send it back! She told them to arrange to have it picked up, which they did. They fixed it (and actually it died right away, and they fixed it a second time - aarrgh!), but since then it's worked perfectly...
>>So DOS the heel out off those servers and make it gpl software!
>I wonder who modded that down...
What? I hope you don't think a Denial of Service is a good thing. DOSing is never a good idea.
I understand you were picking up on the point that there may be other interpretations to their license, but I don't think it's unreasonable that someone modded down a post that instructs people to launch a DOS...
Oh, I know how to do this! I just bought an adapter plus software to interface a PC to the on-board computer. This thing works like a charm.
I don't know that all on-board computers know when the oil was changed or coolant was flushed, but I'm sure a couple perl script could take care of schedule maintenance.
Just bring plenty of "film". Whether that's extra flash cards or extra rolls. Any real photographer is NOT going to run out of film. If they do, they are just an amateur.
As much as I think the RIAA is mistreating its customers and egaging in anti-competitive practices, I would be willing to pay $5 per month for Napster. That doesn't seem like a bad deal for legally acquiring music. I'm not sure if everyone acts like I do, but if I was paying a subscription for Napster, I would actually buy less CDs. Today, I get recommendations for an artist, download, listen and then (if I like them) go buy the CD. I don't mind supporting artists I like. But with a legitimate subscription service, I wouldn't feel as compelled to go and buy a CD.
So I wonder if this will backfire and result in less revenue for the record industry.
Incidentally, I'm curious if that "war" also applies to Americans who call in bomb threats to, and firebomb mosques, and shoot down Indian Sikhs. That qualifies as terrorism as far as I'm concerned.
I hope so. I don't think terrorists in the US (citizens or not) should be exempt.
I'll tell you. When we get lawmakers/judges that have a clue. This stuff is going to go on as long as Microsoft keeps getting away with it. In effect, MS is continually rewarded by strongarming competition!
I vote with my dollar -- MS hasn't seen any of my money for a long, long time.
Of course there's life out there around other stars and most likely in our own solar system. I don't understand why we always assume that the life must be oxygen-based. There must be other systems out there deriving energy that don't rely on an oxygen cycle.
I believe life must exist even in places that have traditionally been considered too "inhospitable".
According to the license it doesn't say you can't use Open Motif for non-open-source operating systems. It simply says that the rights granted under that public license only apply to open source OSs. It goes on to say that you must contact the Open Group for the license that applies to distribution for non-open-source operating systems.
I wouldn't say no one is pushing electric-only cars. I just read an article in Southwest Airlines in-flight magazine, Spirit, that discusses this exact thing. There are groups of environmentalists that view the hybrid as only a first step in the right direction. In fact, some are calling the hybrids only a half-hearted attempt by the auto manufacturers to address the real problem which is how to get to true non fossil fuel cars.
There are alternatives such as fuel cells, solar, etc each of which has drawbacks. All we really need is an economic incentive for people to move to alternatives. As long as it's cheaper for consumers to operate traditional vehicles, we will never get to the next-gen technology.
I found a couple of articles in Scientific American that are interesting but a few years old.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the article said they used raman amplification, not Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers. Raman can be used in either the C-band (1530 to 1565nm - typically where EDFAs are used), or the L-band (1565 - 1625nm). Actually, I think Raman can be used at any point in the spectrum, but don't quote me on that because I am not a physicist!
EDFAs do allow signals to travel long distances, but the problem is that they are "single point" amplifiers. The signal gets attenuated down quite a bit after traveling 50 miles or so and then is boosted back up by the EDFA. The signal to noise ratio has already dropped too low and can't be recovered. So with EDFAs you are limited to a relatively small number of hops (six or so) before it has to be electrically regenerated (detect the signal and then electrically send it to a laser to be retransmitted cleanly).
Raman amplifiers use an effect called Stimulated Raman Scattering that uses the fiber in the ground as the amplifier itself. By using a pump laser transmitted into the fiber (typically opposite to the direction of data flow), the power of the pump laser's low wavelength is transferred in the glass to the higher wavelengths of the data signals. Amplification is then distributed along that 50 miles of fiber or so between pump lasers. The signal power never gets as low with Raman as with EDFAs, so the signal to noise ratio is kept higher. That's how they are able to get much longer distances between electrical regeneration out of these new systems.
I don't know much about SOAs, but I've heard they are not good for multichannel systems. Something about the fact that they are noisy? I think they are good for single channel applications.
This research is great and all, but telecom providers are having enough trouble selling capacity on their existing EDFA systems. Something is going to have to drive a lot of demand for bandwidth before systems like this one from Lucent get deployed.
I think this is the one:
1 53206
4 8&t=an
href=http://slashdot.org/article.pl?id=01/07/08/2
A better article is here:
http://www.anandtech.com/news/shownews.html?i=144
I wouldn't say that they mapped the CIA's network. Sure, they found some machine names that route mail. Big deal. I'll bet more that half of the slashdotters here could have gotten the same (or more) information. I don't see how knowing what machines route mail pose any security threat. Anyone outside the network could just look at their mail headers and see what internal machines were used to forward the mail.
If someone can get classified information from CIA via social engineering, I'd say someone needs to be retrained. These guys should be on the lookout for that at all times.
It hasn't worked that way for a long time, but here's what used to happen in some implementations:
- Send an SNMP set or get to a box. Use any ol' random community string.
- The box then sends an SNMP trap to its management station which contained the cleartext real community string.
If you had a packet sniffer, you could easily get the community string. I don't remember offhand if the trap contained the read-only or read-write string, but still, either way, I don't want a device doing that.
That was a long time ago. I can't imagine any devices still have such a hole unless they haven't been upgraded in years.
I had (still have, actually) a Palm V that I once sat on during a meeting. The screen was completely cracked. I called Palm's customer support and told them I needed it to be repaired. They didn't even ask me what was wrong. Apparently, it's a fixed price for repair no matter what happens to it.
If I wored in IT/IS at that company I'd call Palm myself. It's worth a shot.
Another story... A few years ago when I was working at an ISP, they had a beautiful 21-inch monitor that arrived DOA. The distributor they got it from just sent a new one right away and never asked for the other one back. This thing sat in a storeroom for almost a year. I asked about buying it, thinking they would say no, but I was surprised when they agreed to sell it to me for 10% of their cost. So I ended up paying $95 for it -- 1998, so that was a great deal!
I tried to get it repaired at several local TV repair shops, but none said they could fix it. I was starting to think I'd wasted my money, but my wife just called the manufacturer, gave them the serial number and they said, sure it's under warranty, just send it back! She told them to arrange to have it picked up, which they did. They fixed it (and actually it died right away, and they fixed it a second time - aarrgh!), but since then it's worked perfectly...
>>So DOS the heel out off those servers and make it gpl software!
>I wonder who modded that down...
What? I hope you don't think a Denial of Service is a good thing. DOSing is never a good idea.
I understand you were picking up on the point that there may be other interpretations to their license, but I don't think it's unreasonable that someone modded down a post that instructs people to launch a DOS...
Oh, I know how to do this! I just bought an adapter plus software to interface a PC to the on-board computer. This thing works like a charm.
I don't know that all on-board computers know when the oil was changed or coolant was flushed, but I'm sure a couple perl script could take care of schedule maintenance.
Hey-ba man-ba, I need-ba 256 more Mebi-bytes in this here lap-ba-top...
Just bring plenty of "film". Whether that's extra flash cards or extra rolls. Any real photographer is NOT going to run out of film. If they do, they are just an amateur.
As much as I think the RIAA is mistreating its customers and egaging in anti-competitive practices, I would be willing to pay $5 per month for Napster. That doesn't seem like a bad deal for legally acquiring music. I'm not sure if everyone acts like I do, but if I was paying a subscription for Napster, I would actually buy less CDs. Today, I get recommendations for an artist, download, listen and then (if I like them) go buy the CD. I don't mind supporting artists I like. But with a legitimate subscription service, I wouldn't feel as compelled to go and buy a CD.
So I wonder if this will backfire and result in less revenue for the record industry.
Incidentally, I'm curious if that "war" also applies to Americans who call in bomb threats to, and firebomb mosques, and shoot down Indian Sikhs. That qualifies as terrorism as far as I'm concerned.
I hope so. I don't think terrorists in the US (citizens or not) should be exempt.
Yikes... That would suck to fall asleep after reading for two hours and wake up to realize your book has expired!
Is this thing just to prove a point?
I know, size doesn't matter...
Careful though, you might get sued by criMoSoft for ifringing on the bloated operating system (tm) patent.
We sent out an instant message to all the users letting them know about the outage.
I'll tell you. When we get lawmakers/judges that have a clue. This stuff is going to go on as long as Microsoft keeps getting away with it. In effect, MS is continually rewarded by strongarming competition!
I vote with my dollar -- MS hasn't seen any of my money for a long, long time.
Of course there's life out there around other stars and most likely in our own solar system. I don't understand why we always assume that the life must be oxygen-based. There must be other systems out there deriving energy that don't rely on an oxygen cycle.
I believe life must exist even in places that have traditionally been considered too "inhospitable".
According to the license it doesn't say you can't use Open Motif for non-open-source operating systems. It simply says that the rights granted under that public license only apply to open source OSs. It goes on to say that you must contact the Open Group for the license that applies to distribution for non-open-source operating systems.
There are alternatives such as fuel cells, solar, etc each of which has drawbacks. All we really need is an economic incentive for people to move to alternatives. As long as it's cheaper for consumers to operate traditional vehicles, we will never get to the next-gen technology.
I found a couple of articles in Scientific American that are interesting but a few years old.
http://www.sciam.com/1196issue/1196sperling.html
http://www.sciam.com/1097issue/1097wouk.html