It could be that new hire in cubicle #2 downloading Hello Kitty Tea Party. Wait, I bet it's that guy who still doesn't get The Sixth Sense so he's downloading it again. I got my fingers crossed for him.
You did not elaborate into how efficient your network is but rather just ask for a new company by insisting that the shared plan is to blame. I'd stick my head into the network and figure out why delay is increasing.
If all else fails, I find that a reliable jitter is the best and letting the network traffic produce the jitter is not the best idea. Let me know if you want more information on this.
Sorry, I can't answer your question because it is a satellite connection. I feel everyone's pain.
You take User A who doesn't realize the motherboard they are taunting as better than another is made just down the block from the 'quality' pcb and they'll dispute this entire article just to make a point.
User B, who has used 'crap' for the last 5 years with no failures will just shrug it off, and realize that User A has no proof, and is in a Sega Penises and Super Phlegmtendo war.
Bottom line, people will fight:
"Now the quality argument has been eroded away as well, since yes, the copies are made in cheap sweatshops in China. Guess what? SO ARE THE ORIGINALS! There is no quality argument anymore for brand vs. copy."
Why? It's simple really, there is a black box for everything and User A has no clue how it's made even though they've got an associate from a pay and get your degree school.
"SkyNet and then where will we be? Huh?? Did you think of that??? "
Actually, I've already thought of that.
There has already been talk of GPS enabled radios that would monitor for emissions from others and re-adjust channels/frequency automatically without any control. You could call it FCC mandated QOS for radio, and the FCC supplies the list of who get what priority. Or is the FCC Skynet already?
The real meat of my reply was that the only way 'reusing' spectrum would be feasible is if the radios communicate about interference detected and adjust power levels. Let's face it, with that close of co-channel use, it's reusing spectrum.
I know just about every radio goes outside it's alloted center frequency. Trouble is, 500mhz can cause problems with 499mhz. If the radio that has secondary intent on the spectrum it's transmitting on and is causing problems, it must be notified and either switch off, or lower emission.
How is the radio going to know it's interferring if it cannot detect the emissions of the main broadcasting tower, nor receive feedback from other radios that could receive both the primary and secondary users of that frequency or co-channel?
Enter Skynet! We'll send big robots in to just crush and destroy the radio instead of using a control channel to let the transmitter know it's causing problems. No FCC visit needed, and the pesky radio will no longer interfere!
Now the headline will be:
"FCC boots Skynet up to control drones, ushering in fast cheap Internet"
It's true, TV spectrum is afforded more protection than in areas right now that are being bombarded with unintended RF from the BPL trials. BPL is given almost a 'do what you want' license right now for testing, when the FCC knows it's causing problems.
AT&T, Sprint or whomever wins the auction will provide some form of high speed Internet on that 700mhz pie they won. There's already speeds of greater than 1gbps on the gigaherz spectrum, and claims of 54mbps on around 20mhz of 900mhz.
I'm not going to speculate too much, but I'd garner that with the 700mhz auction coming up, the FCC isn't likely to go 'easy' on any device that uses TV spectrum, lest they scare away record numbers for that auction.
In any case, this partnership helps one key thing: smart radios that pickup and re-use spectrum not being used. There's too much waste, even the cellular companies are guilty of this, and it's the next generation to detect and re-use.
It's time the radios get smarter, and start talking to one another.... coordination by the radios themselves is the only way to assure the spectrum is used all the time.
Rain/snow/brimstone may affect your reception so why can't that be exploited?
As a person with a vested interest in a large Wifi/900/5ghz system that has many pleased users, I welcome Google and their stance. We'd love to lease bandwidth and open devices, as the 700mhz would allow us to penetrate in places unthinkable until now, with power that would make you shiver.
I'd imagine Ubiquiti's frequency freedom would scale nice, with the addition of some wattage.
I'm not happy to see AT&T taking over yet another town, charging $70 a month for GSM coverage, using technology only they will sanction. I'm all for Google setting base rules to how the radios will share the airtime, and if someone wants to use a different modulation supported in a software radio they've installed, it's kosher with them.
In any case, 700mhz should afford at least 2megabit imho, even more in the future, and with the mhz available, possibly 20-30megabit. I don't want to see this in the hands of someone who just wants to sell data plans, it's much better in the hands of someone who wants to show ads, and let other people sell the service. I'm all for the open system, just like local competition in DSL is allowed, so Google is important, but dispensable, as the most desirable element is the reselling of the service.
I for one know, my customers will choose us over Google, Cingular, Sprint, Nextel, or Verizon.
I've seen plenty of people truly expect to get 5-6 miles of people connected to one AP, and in many cities, the number of AP's is horrendous, but yet everyone expects an indoor network. One city block for indoor coverage is not going to happen, but an AP on every light pole just might.
Where I live, an AP on every 3 light poles would get the job done, connect everything with laptops, probably 90% indoors, but yet everyone groans it can't be done. It's just crazy that it's expected to wait 5 years on a tower thats 800 feet above sea level, then finally start deploying on the ground on city provided poles.
While I see users come into our computer store weekly, with all the sleep and hibernation features working fine, a partner on the other hand says he's never seen one work right. It's so 'broken' in XP, 98, ME that it's branded a Microsoft problem every single time instead of an ACPI problem, or a driver issue that the vendor didn't work out.
Irregardless I think many people have no business mandating that it's all broken without having ever tried to call any tech support to get that one guy who wants to do his job. Tracking down a blue screen's cause helps and in many cases helps get you closer to a real Google answer, which is something I've never seen another tech do... Debugging on a windows machine.
In tracking down bugs, I'm sure Microsoft, Dell, HP, Gateway, Intel, MSI, Giga-byte, Asus, Abit, Award, AMI, ECS, Soyo and others all want these features to work. Any bug tracking includes hundreds of samples, not just 20 odd motherboards or recollections from many years: after all if it's been broken and never works, then why is Microsoft still trying to do it... give it up.
Ryzom is rough, the graphics could use a touch of work, and it's nonetheless a bit quirky in the movement.
All the downsides considered, Ryzom has interesting features like stanzas, supposed always moving roots in the sky, and a pretty decent looking enviroment.
Open source doesn't always mean free however, and providing the means for thousands of people to connect and play would be a problem. However, it seems like enough people not unlike myself would be happy to host a server for a few hundred people minimum, or more for no charge.
For being crowded in the fantasy mmorpg sector, http://multiverse.net/ is gonna have some problems unless some really new games hit the market.
Sometimes I forget that we must take the same artists over and over until we are 60 years old. We only have enough money to keep giving it to one person.
Funny how all the reports are that the artists get nothing for the plays on Myspace, just the label. How wonderful for just one entity.
This shouldn't surprise anyone at all in the world, but the implications are damning for those that like to share what they like: Stop it, and stop it now unless you pay for it.
Oh, you like XYZ? Where can I find XYZ's song to see if I like it?
You can't, it's locked up in litigation.
Why?
The licensing requirements are steep, so it only shows up on one site only.
Stifling? Oh yes.
Legal? Very much so.
They are so deep in the trees that they can't see how much Myspace can help smaller bands, and artist discovery. Someone will pay however until something else new comes along and gives them a new jolt of cash until they decide they want more in licensing.
(I never knew the Pixies before Myspace and a whole lot of other bands.)
I can see it now, the MPAA taking a blind user to court because her retina implants put out unintended radiation that allowed the neighbor's kids to watch movies that she was seeing on their tv's.
Of course they'll win, since the blind user didn't know the retina implants didn't have an HDMI plug on the end, and Macrovision wasn't applied as a second measure either.
I was on team B I think, and I can't say I was happy with however rackspace told them to handle our case, versus others.
I'm sure they are fanatical when it comes to overtime too.
I think it's a onion layer approach.
But all the security on those layers waste precious per packet limits.
In most cases, there is a way to secure wireless in your personal case, and for even wisp applications.
Imagine a wisp that does have WPA, then when you get access to the system, you can view everyone else's information due to a bridge/router mistake?
WPA will never help the basic lack of information due to actually using the equipment and breaking it.
It's a good point to make really, that this crap flows on a daily basis from so many different sources, how can we expect consumer to know -why- a router costs more?
When you have articles and other biz that use a wep only, saying it's secure, why would anyone buy the one that says more secure? They don't, it's shoved in their attic and an antennae attached.
This isn't just a consumer problem, it's a major professional problem.
http://www.ezwv.com/wireless.html
While we know it's not the case, they are spreading the misinformation and making it a bad image when someone does get hacked.
Now who here thinks that wireless is more secure?
I look at it this way, are you the most visible?
If you are the last unprotected AP in town, then watch out.
Otherwise, they'll probably use the one that is next to the coffee shop, with chicks that walk by every 5 minutes. Not the one that is next to the senior center.
If someone parks at my house, the dog is my WiFi security alarm.
If your life is an open book anyway, wifi security is a moot point, yes.
That's what I was told from a customer who thought they had wireless in their house. I said, nope, your Charter doesn't have wireless included, it's a neighbor.
They didn't care that people up to 2-3 miles away could see them surfing.
You could loose your ISP, if you are used to attack in a way that makes them want to fire you as a customer.
The article doesn't do any justice to the main problem:
Most routers, AP's and clients are not that available for updates.
For instance, there is no less than 3 wisp's in our area that claim to be secure, and get this 'more secure' than a wired line.
What do they use to get this amazing security?
WEP, not pre-shared or enhanced, or rotating keys, plain old WEP.
Did they have this equipment up 3 years ago, and clearly didn't know right?
Nope, this is new equipment, new cisco ap's, they choose to buy other equipment that can't be secured.
Even those in the know apparently don't care, or are too worried about learning new terms and setup procedures.
I had no idea that a bad hard drive would knock me offline for 6 hours while they solved other customers problems.
Then to top it off, they wouldn't copy the data over for me, or even run any type of sector relocation.
I was told that they are fanatical, but they only have so many techs and someone has to wait.
That doesn't sound fanatical, that sounds like an excuse to not hire enough techs to really manage.
This was on -their- server, not mine. Their hard drive, not mine, so I don't know what the problem is.
Get all extra services you can, they'll give it to you when you go down.
I.E. If your servers are down, they will take anywhere from 3-6 hours to get back up, and they will -not- refund money for that downtime, or acknowledge it was slow.
If your account manager tells you that they can't control every facet of your account, ask em' they'll tell you.
So get the extra backup service, and get 16 servers, you'll need them.
And don't expect them to budge on anything you need, if it's in the contract you are sealed and signed for a reaming however they wish to do it.
I already did for other reasons good enough, but this just puts the lid on the deal, and makes me feel better.
Not only 2 days ago I found out rackspace cannot lean from corporate policies at all, and they refuse to tell you who can bend the rules.
From server downtimes that were fanatical, and had me very irritated, to customer managers who are reading from cards, you are advised to find someone else.
Even your uncle Hank who has the direcway dish is a better choice for hosting.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks like Wolfram's neighbor found out it was leeching wireless and put a WPA key on it.
It could be that new hire in cubicle #2 downloading Hello Kitty Tea Party. Wait, I bet it's that guy who still doesn't get The Sixth Sense so he's downloading it again. I got my fingers crossed for him. You did not elaborate into how efficient your network is but rather just ask for a new company by insisting that the shared plan is to blame. I'd stick my head into the network and figure out why delay is increasing. If all else fails, I find that a reliable jitter is the best and letting the network traffic produce the jitter is not the best idea. Let me know if you want more information on this. Sorry, I can't answer your question because it is a satellite connection. I feel everyone's pain.
You take User A who doesn't realize the motherboard they are taunting as better than another is made just down the block from the 'quality' pcb and they'll dispute this entire article just to make a point.
User B, who has used 'crap' for the last 5 years with no failures will just shrug it off, and realize that User A has no proof, and is in a Sega Penises and Super Phlegmtendo war.
Bottom line, people will fight:
"Now the quality argument has been eroded away as well, since yes, the copies are made in cheap sweatshops in China. Guess what? SO ARE THE ORIGINALS! There is no quality argument anymore for brand vs. copy."
Why? It's simple really, there is a black box for everything and User A has no clue how it's made even though they've got an associate from a pay and get your degree school.
We are dealing with a past and future traveling radio smashing AI.
Nobody knows yet, but that's what the new Terminator movie is gonna be about.
"SkyNet and then where will we be? Huh?? Did you think of that??? "
Actually, I've already thought of that.
There has already been talk of GPS enabled radios that would monitor for emissions from others and re-adjust channels/frequency automatically without any control. You could call it FCC mandated QOS for radio, and the FCC supplies the list of who get what priority.
Or is the FCC Skynet already?
The real meat of my reply was that the only way 'reusing' spectrum would be feasible is if the radios communicate about interference detected and adjust power levels. Let's face it, with that close of co-channel use, it's reusing spectrum.
I know just about every radio goes outside it's alloted center frequency. Trouble is, 500mhz can cause problems with 499mhz. If the radio that has secondary intent on the spectrum it's transmitting on and is causing problems, it must be notified and either switch off, or lower emission.
How is the radio going to know it's interferring if it cannot detect the emissions of the main broadcasting tower, nor receive feedback from other radios that could receive both the primary and secondary users of that frequency or co-channel?
Enter Skynet! We'll send big robots in to just crush and destroy the radio instead of using a control channel to let the transmitter know it's causing problems. No FCC visit needed, and the pesky radio will no longer interfere!
Now the headline will be:
"FCC boots Skynet up to control drones, ushering in fast cheap Internet"
It's true, TV spectrum is afforded more protection than in areas right now that are being bombarded with unintended RF from the BPL trials. BPL is given almost a 'do what you want' license right now for testing, when the FCC knows it's causing problems.
AT&T, Sprint or whomever wins the auction will provide some form of high speed Internet on that 700mhz pie they won. There's already speeds of greater than 1gbps on the gigaherz spectrum, and claims of 54mbps on around 20mhz of 900mhz.
I'm not going to speculate too much, but I'd garner that with the 700mhz auction coming up, the FCC isn't likely to go 'easy' on any device that uses TV spectrum, lest they scare away record numbers for that auction.
In any case, this partnership helps one key thing: smart radios that pickup and re-use spectrum not being used. There's too much waste, even the cellular companies are guilty of this, and it's the next generation to detect and re-use.
It's time the radios get smarter, and start talking to one another.... coordination by the radios themselves is the only way to assure the spectrum is used all the time.
Rain/snow/brimstone may affect your reception so why can't that be exploited?
I'm a filthy erotic poetry writer, Snow White and the Sub Gigahertz Dwarves.
As a person with a vested interest in a large Wifi/900/5ghz system that has many pleased users, I welcome Google and their stance. We'd love to lease bandwidth and open devices, as the 700mhz would allow us to penetrate in places unthinkable until now, with power that would make you shiver. I'd imagine Ubiquiti's frequency freedom would scale nice, with the addition of some wattage. I'm not happy to see AT&T taking over yet another town, charging $70 a month for GSM coverage, using technology only they will sanction. I'm all for Google setting base rules to how the radios will share the airtime, and if someone wants to use a different modulation supported in a software radio they've installed, it's kosher with them. In any case, 700mhz should afford at least 2megabit imho, even more in the future, and with the mhz available, possibly 20-30megabit. I don't want to see this in the hands of someone who just wants to sell data plans, it's much better in the hands of someone who wants to show ads, and let other people sell the service. I'm all for the open system, just like local competition in DSL is allowed, so Google is important, but dispensable, as the most desirable element is the reselling of the service. I for one know, my customers will choose us over Google, Cingular, Sprint, Nextel, or Verizon.
I've seen plenty of people truly expect to get 5-6 miles of people connected to one AP, and in many cities, the number of AP's is horrendous, but yet everyone expects an indoor network. One city block for indoor coverage is not going to happen, but an AP on every light pole just might.
Where I live, an AP on every 3 light poles would get the job done, connect everything with laptops, probably 90% indoors, but yet everyone groans it can't be done. It's just crazy that it's expected to wait 5 years on a tower thats 800 feet above sea level, then finally start deploying on the ground on city provided poles.
While I see users come into our computer store weekly, with all the sleep and hibernation features working fine, a partner on the other hand says he's never seen one work right. It's so 'broken' in XP, 98, ME that it's branded a Microsoft problem every single time instead of an ACPI problem, or a driver issue that the vendor didn't work out. Irregardless I think many people have no business mandating that it's all broken without having ever tried to call any tech support to get that one guy who wants to do his job. Tracking down a blue screen's cause helps and in many cases helps get you closer to a real Google answer, which is something I've never seen another tech do... Debugging on a windows machine. In tracking down bugs, I'm sure Microsoft, Dell, HP, Gateway, Intel, MSI, Giga-byte, Asus, Abit, Award, AMI, ECS, Soyo and others all want these features to work. Any bug tracking includes hundreds of samples, not just 20 odd motherboards or recollections from many years: after all if it's been broken and never works, then why is Microsoft still trying to do it... give it up.
Ryzom is rough, the graphics could use a touch of work, and it's nonetheless a bit quirky in the movement. All the downsides considered, Ryzom has interesting features like stanzas, supposed always moving roots in the sky, and a pretty decent looking enviroment. Open source doesn't always mean free however, and providing the means for thousands of people to connect and play would be a problem. However, it seems like enough people not unlike myself would be happy to host a server for a few hundred people minimum, or more for no charge. For being crowded in the fantasy mmorpg sector, http://multiverse.net/ is gonna have some problems unless some really new games hit the market.
Sometimes I forget that we must take the same artists over and over until we are 60 years old. We only have enough money to keep giving it to one person. Funny how all the reports are that the artists get nothing for the plays on Myspace, just the label. How wonderful for just one entity.
This shouldn't surprise anyone at all in the world, but the implications are damning for those that like to share what they like: Stop it, and stop it now unless you pay for it. Oh, you like XYZ? Where can I find XYZ's song to see if I like it? You can't, it's locked up in litigation. Why? The licensing requirements are steep, so it only shows up on one site only. Stifling? Oh yes. Legal? Very much so. They are so deep in the trees that they can't see how much Myspace can help smaller bands, and artist discovery. Someone will pay however until something else new comes along and gives them a new jolt of cash until they decide they want more in licensing. (I never knew the Pixies before Myspace and a whole lot of other bands.)
I can see it now, the MPAA taking a blind user to court because her retina implants put out unintended radiation that allowed the neighbor's kids to watch movies that she was seeing on their tv's. Of course they'll win, since the blind user didn't know the retina implants didn't have an HDMI plug on the end, and Macrovision wasn't applied as a second measure either.
I was on team B I think, and I can't say I was happy with however rackspace told them to handle our case, versus others.
I'm sure they are fanatical when it comes to overtime too.
I think it's a onion layer approach.
But all the security on those layers waste precious per packet limits.
In most cases, there is a way to secure wireless in your personal case, and for even wisp applications.
Imagine a wisp that does have WPA, then when you get access to the system, you can view everyone else's information due to a bridge/router mistake?
WPA will never help the basic lack of information due to actually using the equipment and breaking it.
It's a good point to make really, that this crap flows on a daily basis from so many different sources, how can we expect consumer to know -why- a router costs more?
When you have articles and other biz that use a wep only, saying it's secure, why would anyone buy the one that says more secure? They don't, it's shoved in their attic and an antennae attached.
This isn't just a consumer problem, it's a major professional problem.
http://www.ezwv.com/wireless.html
While we know it's not the case, they are spreading the misinformation and making it a bad image when someone does get hacked.
Now who here thinks that wireless is more secure?
I look at it this way, are you the most visible? If you are the last unprotected AP in town, then watch out.
Otherwise, they'll probably use the one that is next to the coffee shop, with chicks that walk by every 5 minutes. Not the one that is next to the senior center.
If someone parks at my house, the dog is my WiFi security alarm.
If your life is an open book anyway, wifi security is a moot point, yes.
That's what I was told from a customer who thought they had wireless in their house. I said, nope, your Charter doesn't have wireless included, it's a neighbor.
They didn't care that people up to 2-3 miles away could see them surfing.
You could loose your ISP, if you are used to attack in a way that makes them want to fire you as a customer.
The article doesn't do any justice to the main problem:
Most routers, AP's and clients are not that available for updates.
For instance, there is no less than 3 wisp's in our area that claim to be secure, and get this 'more secure' than a wired line.
What do they use to get this amazing security? WEP, not pre-shared or enhanced, or rotating keys, plain old WEP.
Did they have this equipment up 3 years ago, and clearly didn't know right?
Nope, this is new equipment, new cisco ap's, they choose to buy other equipment that can't be secured.
Even those in the know apparently don't care, or are too worried about learning new terms and setup procedures.
I had no idea that a bad hard drive would knock me offline for 6 hours while they solved other customers problems. Then to top it off, they wouldn't copy the data over for me, or even run any type of sector relocation. I was told that they are fanatical, but they only have so many techs and someone has to wait. That doesn't sound fanatical, that sounds like an excuse to not hire enough techs to really manage. This was on -their- server, not mine. Their hard drive, not mine, so I don't know what the problem is.
Get all extra services you can, they'll give it to you when you go down. I.E. If your servers are down, they will take anywhere from 3-6 hours to get back up, and they will -not- refund money for that downtime, or acknowledge it was slow. If your account manager tells you that they can't control every facet of your account, ask em' they'll tell you. So get the extra backup service, and get 16 servers, you'll need them. And don't expect them to budge on anything you need, if it's in the contract you are sealed and signed for a reaming however they wish to do it.
I already did for other reasons good enough, but this just puts the lid on the deal, and makes me feel better. Not only 2 days ago I found out rackspace cannot lean from corporate policies at all, and they refuse to tell you who can bend the rules. From server downtimes that were fanatical, and had me very irritated, to customer managers who are reading from cards, you are advised to find someone else. Even your uncle Hank who has the direcway dish is a better choice for hosting.
It's RIFBI, and they are starting tour next year and they are gonna seize the hip-hop industry!