I think the real issue is how will 802.11x handle issues such as jitter, prioritization and sustatained bit rates(SBR/SCR)? I have not seen a large scale VOIP solution running over any 802.11 network for an enterprise. I am not saying it doesn't exist but if it does I would love to see how it addresses the above issues.
If your phone service is with Verizon then go to http://www.vtext.com and under personalization there is a tab for message blocking in which you can block either a specific address or an entire domain.
I have noticed a real growth in the types of weapons over the years. It started out with wedges and flippers with a couple of saws and spinners but now you have a lot of hybrids and new forms of old weapons that are even more powerful. For example, what is considered a spinner now? Atomic War head with the spinning shield and moving "wings", Son of Wyachi with the heavy spinning hammers, Mechavore with the spinning disk, Mauler whith the entire outer shell spinning.
I never thought a battle would be as exciting as watching Vlad and Biohazard. But watching some of the newer bots like Son of Wyachi take out Nightmare or even the finals with Biohazard changed my mind.
The more successul a design the more other have to engineer around it. Flippers are now countered by self righting mechanism or even invertable bots. Flippers can't take out an bot in 1 flip any more so not spinners are becoming more common.
I also thought I read about a bot that had a sensor in it that deployed the weapon when the other bot was in position. I think if Battlebots is picked up we will see more of that.
I worked with local ISP setting them up and I have seen hundreds of business plans and network designs and if any local ISP wants to stay in business then they will have to oversubscribe their bandwidth. It is simple math/economics. If they buy a T-3 (45mbps) for $20,000/mo then how many T-1s for $500/mo do they have to sell just to break even on their bandwidth charges?
Also, keep in mind that just because the local will give you a full 1.544 mbps now doesn't mean that he won't later oversubscribe his capacity.
Depending on what you are doing, latency is also an issue with locals. Find out if they are getting their bandwidth from a backbone provider.
with private peering points among the national backbone providers. International traffic though would be more vunerable but far less than in previous years. The trans-atlantic/pacific cables themselves would seem to be a bigger target but given where they are located and what would have to happen to take them out it would seem very unlikely.
1xRTT is a 3G technology as it offers current max speed of 153kbps and increased network capacity and battery life. It is an upgrade from the old CDMAone standard to CDMA 2000.
Compare this to GPRS which is a 2.5G technology. It offers no other enhanced features to the system other than slightly faster data speeds. In order for GPRS to reach 1x speeds the carrier would have to dedicate 8 concatenated channels and turn off error correction. This is obviously not deployable in this form for real life situations.
Also consider the future of each technology. Enhanced GPRS (EDGE) has a max speed of 384kbps and 1xEV-DO is about 2.4mbps.
Actually I don't think most GSM carriers are implementing EDGE but instead GPRS and will upgrade to EDGE later. GPRS maxes out at about 171kbps ( compared to 307 kbps with 1xrtt) with all 8 channels of a base station devoted to a single call. To upgrade to EDGE and thus to 384 kbps they will have to go through further backbone modifications and still not be at 3G.
They will then have to do more major backbone modifcations to get 2mbps speeds when they move to CDMA-DS. I am baffled why certain TDMA carriers are investing millions in changing over to GSM only to have to eventually change over to CDMA in the future. Unless they are betting on further enhancement to the GSM standard to make such changes pointless.
It is twice as fast as a normal dial up connection and will probably be slightly more expensive. If all you want is wireless internet at you house then of course a 802.11 device would be better. However, there are many of us that would like connect our laptops to the internet from more places than our home or office. Right now if I am on the road I either have to connect at 14.4 or use a hotel phone line and pay extra long distance charges at many hotels.
GPRS won't realistically give you more than 30kbps download speeds. The two CDMA carriers in the US are releasing 1XRTT in the immediate future and will give you 2-3 times the speed of GPRS.
You will be able to download games and other apps on any JAVA or BREW enabled phone. Check out http://www.qualcomm.com/brew/ for more info on BREW. I think everyone here knows what JAVA is.
When Bush said paid for by public money he was refering to the connections. If the gvt is already paying for an internet connection to a library then why shouldn't they have the right to block what ever sites they don't want access. I agree that public money is money the gvt has taken from us but if we are already paying for the connection then why not add filtering software. I know filtering is not the best way to prevent kids going to porn sites but it is a step in the right direction.
Now accounts not receiving public funds should not be forced into a mandatory program and that is not what I hear suggested by Bush. If the gvt is going to provide portals to the internet with public money they must be careful to make sure that the information/content being viewed is not harmful to those viewing it.
Apple can always upgrade the graphic cards before the cube ships and have a jazzy press release. ATI missed a great chance to have their new flag ship product demoed during a prime time event that many of their customers are paying attention to. Also they risk losing one of their biggest OEM vendors to nVidia. Let's face it ATI now has competition in a market that was 100% ATI. Do you actually think having the ATI 128 is affecting the amount of positive press the Cube is getting? Once the hype wears off and the mainstream starts to think about it then Apple can start hyping the Cube again by annoucing the new ATI card or the new nVidia card. Either way Apple wins ATI loses.
You are comparing two totally different services. If you want something to compare to then compare your 1mbps connection to a dsl or cable modem connection which is roughly the same. There is big difference between that and a dedicated fiber optic connection to the backbone.
It appeared to me that the article failed to distinguish the difference between local loop charges and bandwidth charges. It also failed to note the improvement of the backbones since the early 90's. The bottom line is the Tier 1 providers have spent billions of dollars to upgrade the backbones to DS3s to OC3 to OC12 to OC48 to OC192 to eventually OC768 and beyond. I would much rather pay more for my current access speeds than have a 1mbps line for free that is shared with hundreds of others. If the gvt had built and paid for the current fiber infrastructure then I can see the outrage for charging such rates for bandwidth but they didn't and bandwidth is getting cheaper by the day with out the gvt being involved. If a company spends billions on infrastructure and millions per year to maintain it but then allowed any isp to use their access for free or dirt cheap then everyone would be out of luck when they go out of business.
Based on you description of your set up it appears that you are only located in a single data center. I am curious why you haven't diversified your dependency on a single data center and use some thing like Network Director or Hopscotch (if it is still around). I have never worked with Arrowpoint but am familar with Cisco Local Director (and MLBA). Can anyone comment on the comparison between the two
The 40 gbps (OC 768) has been acheived already here in the US and is being implented by a company called Enkido in NY. Their CEO was the CTO for Qwest. They are currently using the bandwidth for private connectivity not internet connectivity but my understanding is that they already have corporate users. I believe that uuNet and BBN have also demonstrated similar throughput. To clarify some previous posts the 40 gbps is using DWDM on one lambda, one wavelength, and one optical channel. This gives the fiber as a whole a 6.4 tbps speed. There will likely be annoucements in the near future for speeds at about 100 gbps per lambda with the total speed of the fiber being about 10 Tbps. Now if they can just deliver that a fraction of that to my "out of DSL and cable modem range" home I would be happy.
Most telcos "prefer" you use their default router because they are either manufactured my the same company the makes their DSLAMs or recommended by the DSLAM mfg. Most however allow you to use what ever router you want as long as it supports which ever protocols they use (DHCP, PPPoE, etc). I personally have seen good results from Cisco, Cayman, and Fujitsu. Most telcos will preconfigure your router for you if you get theirs so the big question is how comfortable are you with router configs. If you think IOS is the best thing since slashdot then grab a Cisco and be happy. I have never met a person with a Cisco router that was unhappy.
Chances are that Qwest was affected as well. I'm still waiting for all the detail but I know two of the isps named own part of the OC192 fiber that Qwest laid. UUnet is owned by MCI so you are correct in saying they were both down as they are the same now. I don't know where the cut took place but it suggests that it is near a meet point. As far as the earth quake splitting America in two my guess is that it wouldn't matter since all the NOCs would be leveled.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the real issue is how will 802.11x handle issues such as jitter, prioritization and sustatained bit rates(SBR/SCR)? I have not seen a large scale VOIP solution running over any 802.11 network for an enterprise. I am not saying it doesn't exist but if it does I would love to see how it addresses the above issues.
It is more of a hybrid as it is CDMA but uses time divided slots. UMTS will likely adopt a similar technique too.
If your phone service is with Verizon then go to http://www.vtext.com and under personalization there is a tab for message blocking in which you can block either a specific address or an entire domain.
I have noticed a real growth in the types of weapons over the years. It started out with wedges and flippers with a couple of saws and spinners but now you have a lot of hybrids and new forms of old weapons that are even more powerful. For example, what is considered a spinner now? Atomic War head with the spinning shield and moving "wings", Son of Wyachi with the heavy spinning hammers, Mechavore with the spinning disk, Mauler whith the entire outer shell spinning.
I never thought a battle would be as exciting as watching Vlad and Biohazard. But watching some of the newer bots like Son of Wyachi take out Nightmare or even the finals with Biohazard changed my mind.
The more successul a design the more other have to engineer around it. Flippers are now countered by self righting mechanism or even invertable bots. Flippers can't take out an bot in 1 flip any more so not spinners are becoming more common.
I also thought I read about a bot that had a sensor in it that deployed the weapon when the other bot was in position. I think if Battlebots is picked up we will see more of that.
I worked with local ISP setting them up and I have seen hundreds of business plans and network designs and if any local ISP wants to stay in business then they will have to oversubscribe their bandwidth. It is simple math/economics. If they buy a T-3 (45mbps) for $20,000/mo then how many T-1s for $500/mo do they have to sell just to break even on their bandwidth charges?
Also, keep in mind that just because the local will give you a full 1.544 mbps now doesn't mean that he won't later oversubscribe his capacity.
Depending on what you are doing, latency is also an issue with locals. Find out if they are getting their bandwidth from a backbone provider.
with private peering points among the national backbone providers. International traffic though would be more vunerable but far less than in previous years. The trans-atlantic/pacific cables themselves would seem to be a bigger target but given where they are located and what would have to happen to take them out it would seem very unlikely.
1xRTT is a 3G technology as it offers current max speed of 153kbps and increased network capacity and battery life. It is an upgrade from the old CDMAone standard to CDMA 2000.
Compare this to GPRS which is a 2.5G technology. It offers no other enhanced features to the system other than slightly faster data speeds. In order for GPRS to reach 1x speeds the carrier would have to dedicate 8 concatenated channels and turn off error correction. This is obviously not deployable in this form for real life situations.
Also consider the future of each technology. Enhanced GPRS (EDGE) has a max speed of 384kbps and 1xEV-DO is about 2.4mbps.
Actually I don't think most GSM carriers are implementing EDGE but instead GPRS and will upgrade to EDGE later. GPRS maxes out at about 171kbps ( compared to 307 kbps with 1xrtt) with all 8 channels of a base station devoted to a single call. To upgrade to EDGE and thus to 384 kbps they will have to go through further backbone modifications and still not be at 3G.
They will then have to do more major backbone modifcations to get 2mbps speeds when they move to CDMA-DS. I am baffled why certain TDMA carriers are investing millions in changing over to GSM only to have to eventually change over to CDMA in the future. Unless they are betting on further enhancement to the GSM standard to make such changes pointless.
It is twice as fast as a normal dial up connection and will probably be slightly more expensive. If all you want is wireless internet at you house then of course a 802.11 device would be better. However, there are many of us that would like connect our laptops to the internet from more places than our home or office. Right now if I am on the road I either have to connect at 14.4 or use a hotel phone line and pay extra long distance charges at many hotels.
GPRS won't realistically give you more than 30kbps download speeds. The two CDMA carriers in the US are releasing 1XRTT in the immediate future and will give you 2-3 times the speed of GPRS.
You will be able to download games and other apps on any JAVA or BREW enabled phone. Check out http://www.qualcomm.com/brew/ for more info on BREW. I think everyone here knows what JAVA is.
When Bush said paid for by public money he was refering to the connections. If the gvt is already paying for an internet connection to a library then why shouldn't they have the right to block what ever sites they don't want access. I agree that public money is money the gvt has taken from us but if we are already paying for the connection then why not add filtering software. I know filtering is not the best way to prevent kids going to porn sites but it is a step in the right direction. Now accounts not receiving public funds should not be forced into a mandatory program and that is not what I hear suggested by Bush. If the gvt is going to provide portals to the internet with public money they must be careful to make sure that the information/content being viewed is not harmful to those viewing it.
Apple can always upgrade the graphic cards before the cube ships and have a jazzy press release. ATI missed a great chance to have their new flag ship product demoed during a prime time event that many of their customers are paying attention to. Also they risk losing one of their biggest OEM vendors to nVidia. Let's face it ATI now has competition in a market that was 100% ATI. Do you actually think having the ATI 128 is affecting the amount of positive press the Cube is getting? Once the hype wears off and the mainstream starts to think about it then Apple can start hyping the Cube again by annoucing the new ATI card or the new nVidia card. Either way Apple wins ATI loses.
You are comparing two totally different services. If you want something to compare to then compare your 1mbps connection to a dsl or cable modem connection which is roughly the same. There is big difference between that and a dedicated fiber optic connection to the backbone.
It appeared to me that the article failed to distinguish the difference between local loop charges and bandwidth charges. It also failed to note the improvement of the backbones since the early 90's. The bottom line is the Tier 1 providers have spent billions of dollars to upgrade the backbones to DS3s to OC3 to OC12 to OC48 to OC192 to eventually OC768 and beyond. I would much rather pay more for my current access speeds than have a 1mbps line for free that is shared with hundreds of others. If the gvt had built and paid for the current fiber infrastructure then I can see the outrage for charging such rates for bandwidth but they didn't and bandwidth is getting cheaper by the day with out the gvt being involved. If a company spends billions on infrastructure and millions per year to maintain it but then allowed any isp to use their access for free or dirt cheap then everyone would be out of luck when they go out of business.
Based on you description of your set up it appears that you are only located in a single data center. I am curious why you haven't diversified your dependency on a single data center and use some thing like Network Director or Hopscotch (if it is still around). I have never worked with Arrowpoint but am familar with Cisco Local Director (and MLBA). Can anyone comment on the comparison between the two
The 40 gbps (OC 768) has been acheived already here in the US and is being implented by a company called Enkido in NY. Their CEO was the CTO for Qwest. They are currently using the bandwidth for private connectivity not internet connectivity but my understanding is that they already have corporate users. I believe that uuNet and BBN have also demonstrated similar throughput. To clarify some previous posts the 40 gbps is using DWDM on one lambda, one wavelength, and one optical channel. This gives the fiber as a whole a 6.4 tbps speed. There will likely be annoucements in the near future for speeds at about 100 gbps per lambda with the total speed of the fiber being about 10 Tbps. Now if they can just deliver that a fraction of that to my "out of DSL and cable modem range" home I would be happy.
Qwest was responsible for creating the delays and determining the reasons why it couldn't be installed on time.
Most telcos "prefer" you use their default router because they are either manufactured my the same company the makes their DSLAMs or recommended by the DSLAM mfg. Most however allow you to use what ever router you want as long as it supports which ever protocols they use (DHCP, PPPoE, etc). I personally have seen good results from Cisco, Cayman, and Fujitsu. Most telcos will preconfigure your router for you if you get theirs so the big question is how comfortable are you with router configs. If you think IOS is the best thing since slashdot then grab a Cisco and be happy. I have never met a person with a Cisco router that was unhappy.
Chances are that Qwest was affected as well. I'm still waiting for all the detail but I know two of the isps named own part of the OC192 fiber that Qwest laid. UUnet is owned by MCI so you are correct in saying they were both down as they are the same now. I don't know where the cut took place but it suggests that it is near a meet point. As far as the earth quake splitting America in two my guess is that it wouldn't matter since all the NOCs would be leveled.