bandwidth explosion

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View


At work, we signed up with MonkeyBrains for microwave internet
service. We ordered the 50+50 mbit plan. It's actually speed testing
about 350+350.

And at home, a guy from Comcast (our local cable TV pirates) knocked
on the door and proposed to upgrade us for free, faster internet and
more cable TV (including HBO) for about half our current price. They
swapped out the modem today and the internet here is now running about
450+50 mbits. AT&T and Sonic keep leaving flyers on the doorknob
offering us a gigabit.

Sounds like mad competition to give away bandwidth. The backbone fiber
links must be moving astronomical amounts of data. Each county around
here might need a petabit per second.


--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics  


Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 1:44:51 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It was only a few years ago that I was driving to a local store to use the Internet.  There is a price to pay for living where the views are beautiful.  

--  

  Rick C.

  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: bandwidth explosion
On a sunny day (Wed, 17 Jul 2019 22:44:42 -0700) it happened John Larkin

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes, I got a similar flyer here last week,
'Connect to our optical cable, we are now near you... subscribe...'
Threw it away, do not need that much bandwidth, and I am on 4G wireless now,
so stuff works everywhere in the country.
Even youtube works great...
I will buy a Huawei 5G stick when 5G works here.

What do people do that takes so much bandwidth? Upgrade MS windows???


Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thursday, 18 July 2019 07:58:10 UTC+1, Jan Panteltje  wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The reality is that most people use far less than their maximum bandwidth
and the service providers rely on this.

John


Re: bandwidth explosion
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

 If we get a fixed amount of stuff, this merely means that
 we're connected for a shorter amount of time to get it.


--  
 Thanks,
    - Win

Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thursday, 18 July 2019 12:45:11 UTC+1, Winfield Hill  wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

A few people will be constantly downloading video - which they
probably never have time to watch.  Others will send a few emails
and do a bit of browsing using hardly any capacity.
In an office with a few tens of people the internet usage tends
to be quite peaky with a peak-to-mean ratio of around 10 to 1
during working hours for the offices that I look after.  For a
service provider this means that if they only provide enough
backhaul for 10% of the capacity that they sell, hardly anyone
will notice the difference.

Some however don't make even that much provision and they are the
ones that suffer congestion at peak times.

John

Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 8:20:52 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You mean "very few" which is the proportion that actually download video rather than watch it streaming, meaning in real time.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it

These days, even emails have embedded videos.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Isn't that rather a "duh!"... Even the phone company can only connect a small fraction of the number of possible calls which works statistically 99.999% of the time.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yeah, well otherwise we would be paying more for the service.  You get what you pay for... if you are lucky.  

--  

  Rick C.

  + Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thursday, 18 July 2019 14:21:36 UTC+1, Rick C  wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
Yes, but the original post suggested:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Yes, so the providers compete to offer higher speed local connections which
cost them very little, knowing that they will not need to spend much extra
on the backhaul links because most customers will not use more data.

John

Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
r
what you pay for... if you are lucky.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ch
a

I guess I am saying that has not changed.  It was always like that and I ex
pect the number is less than 10%.  Most of the time most people are not eve
n online.  When they are their use is very sporadic unless they are streami
ng which typically is less than 10 Mbps.  

But you are right, they can advertise more bandwidth to the consumer like a
dvertising 25 cup holders in an SUV, sounds nice even if they are never use
d.  

As someone has pointed out, what is more important is the latency.  The res
ponse of the connection needs to feel snappy.  Again, I think most networks
 fulfill that easily.  

As to the original claim, I think a petabit per second is not so hard to ac
hieve.  We had a big push for bandwidth that led to the dot com bubble almo
st 20 years ago and things have only gotten faster and cheaper since then.  
 So much fiber, so little time.  

--  

  Rick C.

  -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 06:58:00 GMT, Jan Panteltje

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Most people won't actually use that bandwidth. Web browsing needs
short bursts. Even movies don't need 500 mbits. So averaged rates
across multiple households will be much lower. But the backbone rates
must still be amazing.


--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics  


Re: bandwidth explosion
On 18/07/19 14:38, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

And frequently latency is more important than bandwidth.

High (average) bandwidth with high latency means there
are many bits in the pipe - and those will be wasted
when re-transmission occurs.

Also, many web transactions are small, to get advertising
cookies, and to enable a real-time auction of your eyeballs.

(And then there are the gamers...)

Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:55:11 +0100, Tom Gardner

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Going from, say, 30 mb to several hundred makes a nice difference when
browsing. It's shocking to me that I can fill a screen with stuff from
France in about a second.

I load a lot of pdf's too, and they are dramatically faster now.

I wish I knew how the Internet actually works. Apparently not many
people really do.


--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics  


Re: bandwidth explosion
On a sunny day (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 07:17:40 -0700) it happened John Larkin

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Sure,
I downloaded (via 4G modem) a complete Linux based distro this week (xinutop),
took a few minutes.
Surprised me, and at least on my PC I can download that in the background if I like,
got latest Debian too that way last month..
 Speed is not so important for that.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I figured that out when I was having the servers at home..
It is actually simple, name servers are like a phonebook lookup for the IP number.
Some things are encrypted these days but for the rest the principle is the same as any LAN.
To navigate and see what's happening you need to know a few Linux commands,
like for example:
whois
host
traceroute
ping
etc etc  
And run some network monitor, I use 'snort'.
Firewalls, Linux has iptables for that.
Know about ports,  
and the most important tool in Linux: netcat :-)
Really netcat is the coolest thing I have.
It makes it so easy to set up a link to anywhere in the world with TCP or UDP,
just from the command line or from a script.
man netcat.
Probably forgot some other stuff, but it is simple.

What I do not like is all that Java crap in browsers, THAT makes things unneeded complex
and slow.
cookies crap...
I use an ad blocker, some sites stop you and want it disabled, too bad I just go elsewhere.
Freedom.

Think I am drifting of topic...

Oh, and use 'wget' to get the files, not the browser.


Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 15:10:03 GMT, Jan Panteltje

Quoted text here. Click to load it

There must be millions of miles of multi-gigabit fibers all over the
world and under the oceans. Gigantic switching and routing centers
somewhere. I don't think it's simple.

I've been told that roughly a dozen people really understand the
system, and that I've met one of them. Nice guy, but he doesn't talk
about what he really does.


--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics  


Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 11:56:43 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yeah, if you assume you are right and there is no way to indicate you are wrong, then I guess you are right.  

I submit suggesting there are only a dozen people in the world that "understand" the world wide web is absurd.  I suppose they are not allowed to be on the same plane or even in the same building at the same time?  

But then this is the guy who says there must be intelligent creation "because"...  

--  

  Rick C.

  +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: bandwidth explosion
On a sunny day (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 08:56:31 -0700) it happened John Larkin

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Na, the only slightly more complictiatiated part is the NSA listening stations at the end
of the intercontinental fibers, one in the UK of course :-)

It is just CABLES man.

NSA reads and stores everything I write, just image what a nice backup,
wonder if I can restore from them...

Come to think of that, Netherlands just increased their F35 order,
to please the trump I think,
much easier with so many around to test my F35 detection system.

For the same reason they no longer sell F35s to Turkey (not the bird).
You gotta give it to Erdogan, he buys Russian S400 missiles,
and US no longer wants him to have that F35 crap.
A win win situation for him.

We should have done the same and buy some Migs too.
My view.

Some guy was spraying the road here with some weed killer this afternoon,
the wind took the poison and it is now in the curtains, I thought
'Oops they finally tracked me down' but he was spraying next doors too,
could be a cover up though.

Man, what a world <censored>


Re: bandwidth explosion
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 08:56:31 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I worked for one of the companies that did wholesale bandwidth and
connectivity in the late 90s and early 2000s.  Dot com, money was
flowing.  At the end there was a LOT of dark fiber laying in the
ground.  If memory serves, we started with 16 wavelengths per fiber,
went to 32 and when we sold out I think it was up to 64 or maybe
128. I've seen ads for 192 wavelengths on a single pair of fiber,
400Gbit/s per wavelength.

Southern Pacific Railroad Internal Network Telecommunications
(aka SPRINT) put a lot of fiber down along their right of way.
I never saw one but they had a train setup to lay the cable.

Pipeline companies where also in the business.  Williams
Communications (WilTEL) came out of Williams Pipeline. They
ran the fiber in decommissioned pipelines.  They had a pig
setup that would run through the line pulling the fiber.

Internet Exchange Points (IXP) used to be this hush hush,
secret handshake to talk about it, thing.  Now you can pull
up a map of the IXPs.  A job a few years ago we were setting
up a data center, got a fiber link to the closest IXP.  They
where almost giving away 10G ports because so many networks
were moving to 100G links.

--  
Chisolm
Republic of Texas


Re: bandwidth explosion

Quoted text here. Click to load it


So now we know where the "dark net" is running :-) :-) :-) :-)  

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I remember talks about 80 colors at 10 Gbit/s each in some
transatlantic fibers of that dot com era.

The standard DWDM raster is 100 GHz channels. Yes, the channels are
really defined in frequency not with wavelengths. I just wonder how
they could put 400 Gbit/s through a 100 GHz channel, no way with 2 or
4 level modulation.

Some have split the 100 Hz channel raster to half channels (50 GHz
suitable for 40 Gbit/s) or quarter channels (25 GHz for 10 Gbit/s).
  

Re: bandwidth explosion

Quoted text here. Click to load it

probably because the NSA forbids him to

m

Re: bandwidth explosion
On 18/07/19 16:10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

There is very little Java in browser nowadays.

There is a lot of JavaScript, but that is very
/very/ different.

The two languages have completely different paradigms
and objectives; the only thing they have in common is
some syntax (which is irrelevant) and part of their name.

Yes, it is worth running adblockers and NoScript - but
note the *Script*.

Site Timeline