Comments for Dadamotive http://www.dadamotive.com On The Edge Of Change Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:14:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Congestion Neutrality by Data caps: A result of not understanding your data | ScienceLogic http://www.dadamotive.com/2009/11/congestion_neutrality/#comment-69 Data caps: A result of not understanding your data | ScienceLogic Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:14:47 +0000 http://dadamotive.local/2009/11/congestion_neutrality/#comment-69 [...] the TCP/IP protocol self-manages connections so that no one user gets more bandwidth than anyone else during times of congestion, because of the [...] [...] the TCP/IP protocol self-manages connections so that no one user gets more bandwidth than anyone else during times of congestion, because of the [...]

]]> Comment on Filling the gap by POTUSworld http://www.dadamotive.com/2011/05/filling-the-gap/#comment-56 POTUSworld Sat, 14 May 2011 18:57:53 +0000 http://www.dadamotive.com/?p=1871#comment-56 I watched with great interest, and some dismay, the PBS Need To Know news segment "High Fiber" here in the U.S. After watching the entire segment (on TV, and later again online), I sometimes feel like we Americans are living in a foggy bubble floating aimlessly in slow motion. Having traveled, seen other similar news stories, checked facts and read diverse data from around the world, it is clear too much of America is like a 19th century man dressed in 21st century clothes. Our facade and egocentric mindset usually blinds us from the reality of what's happening globally. The fiber optics information revolution is just the tip of the iceberg that we're ignoring. We are no longer "Number One" in the things that really matter in this new millennium, like infrastructure, mortality, technology, energy, education and critical thinking. However, we do excel at producing so called reality TV shows — junk food for the brain. Being a bit of a history buff, I am basically aware that civilizations have fallen or flourished based on their access to and dissemination of information. Like the early canals of the Netherlands, fiber optics are the newest arteries of technological and cultural advancement. Thank you for contributing some genuine insight and optimism about where we Americans need to generate more "will" (as you noted so precisely) regarding our infrastructure. I watched with great interest, and some dismay, the PBS Need To Know news segment “High Fiber” here in the U.S. After watching the entire segment (on TV, and later again online), I sometimes feel like we Americans are living in a foggy bubble floating aimlessly in slow motion. Having traveled, seen other similar news stories, checked facts and read diverse data from around the world, it is clear too much of America is like a 19th century man dressed in 21st century clothes.

Our facade and egocentric mindset usually blinds us from the reality of what’s happening globally. The fiber optics information revolution is just the tip of the iceberg that we’re ignoring. We are no longer “Number One” in the things that really matter in this new millennium, like infrastructure, mortality, technology, energy, education and critical thinking. However, we do excel at producing so called reality TV shows — junk food for the brain.

Being a bit of a history buff, I am basically aware that civilizations have fallen or flourished based on their access to and dissemination of information. Like the early canals of the Netherlands, fiber optics are the newest arteries of technological and cultural advancement. Thank you for contributing some genuine insight and optimism about where we Americans need to generate more “will” (as you noted so precisely) regarding our infrastructure.

]]> Comment on The original streams by POTUSworld http://www.dadamotive.com/2011/05/the-original-streams/#comment-55 POTUSworld Sat, 14 May 2011 18:54:08 +0000 http://www.dadamotive.com/?p=1880#comment-55 I watched with great interest, and some dismay, the PBS Need To Know news segment "High Fiber" here in the U.S. After watching the entire segment (on TV, and later again online), I sometimes feel like we Americans are living in a foggy bubble floating aimlessly in slow motion. Having traveled, seen other similar news stories, checked facts and read diverse data from around the world, it is clear too much of America is like a 19th century man dressed in 21st century clothes. Our facade and egocentric mindset usually blinds us from the reality of what's happening globally. The fiber optics information revolution is just the tip of the iceberg that we're ignoring. We are no longer "Number One" in the things that really matter in this new millennium, like infrastructure, mortality, technology, energy, education and critical thinking. However, we do excel at producing so called reality TV shows — junk food for the brain. Being a bit of a history buff, I am basically aware that civilizations have fallen or flourished based on their access to and dissemination of information. Like the early canals of the Netherlands, fiber optics are the newest arteries of technological and cultural advancement. Thank you for contributing some genuine insight and optimism about where we Americans need to generate more "will" (as you noted so precisely) regarding our infrastructure. I watched with great interest, and some dismay, the PBS Need To Know news segment “High Fiber” here in the U.S. After watching the entire segment (on TV, and later again online), I sometimes feel like we Americans are living in a foggy bubble floating aimlessly in slow motion. Having traveled, seen other similar news stories, checked facts and read diverse data from around the world, it is clear too much of America is like a 19th century man dressed in 21st century clothes.

Our facade and egocentric mindset usually blinds us from the reality of what’s happening globally. The fiber optics information revolution is just the tip of the iceberg that we’re ignoring. We are no longer “Number One” in the things that really matter in this new millennium, like infrastructure, mortality, technology, energy, education and critical thinking. However, we do excel at producing so called reality TV shows — junk food for the brain.

Being a bit of a history buff, I am basically aware that civilizations have fallen or flourished based on their access to and dissemination of information. Like the early canals of the Netherlands, fiber optics are the newest arteries of technological and cultural advancement. Thank you for contributing some genuine insight and optimism about where we Americans need to generate more “will” (as you noted so precisely) regarding our infrastructure.

]]> Comment on Too big to fail or not big enough to be critical by POTUSworld http://www.dadamotive.com/2008/10/too_big_to_fail_or_not_big_enough_to_be_critical/#comment-54 POTUSworld Sat, 14 May 2011 18:52:18 +0000 http://dadamotive.local/2008/10/too_big_to_fail_or_not_big_enough_to_be_critical/#comment-54 I watched with great interest, and some dismay, the PBS Need To Know news segment "High Fiber" here in the U.S. After watching the entire segment (on TV, and later again online), I sometimes feel like we Americans are living in a foggy bubble floating aimlessly in slow motion. Having traveled, seen other similar news stories, checked facts and read diverse data from around the world, it is clear too much of America is like a 19th century man dressed in 21st century clothes. Our facade and egocentric mindset usually blinds us from the reality of what's happening globally. The fiber optics information revolution is just the tip of the iceberg that we're ignoring. We are no longer "Number One" in the things that really matter in this new millennium, like infrastructure, mortality, technology, energy, education and critical thinking. However, we do excel at producing so called reality TV shows — junk food for the brain. Being a bit of a history buff, I am basically aware that civilizations have fallen or flourished based on their access to and dissemination of information. Like the early canals of the Netherlands, fiber optics are the newest arteries of technological and cultural advancement. Thank you for contributing some genuine insight and optimism about where we Americans need to generate more "will" (as you noted so precisely) regarding our infrastructure. I watched with great interest, and some dismay, the PBS Need To Know news segment “High Fiber” here in the U.S. After watching the entire segment (on TV, and later again online), I sometimes feel like we Americans are living in a foggy bubble floating aimlessly in slow motion. Having traveled, seen other similar news stories, checked facts and read diverse data from around the world, it is clear too much of America is like a 19th century man dressed in 21st century clothes.

Our facade and egocentric mindset usually blinds us from the reality of what’s happening globally. The fiber optics information revolution is just the tip of the iceberg that we’re ignoring. We are no longer “Number One” in the things that really matter in this new millennium, like infrastructure, mortality, technology, energy, education and critical thinking. However, we do excel at producing so called reality TV shows — junk food for the brain.

Being a bit of a history buff, I am basically aware that civilizations have fallen or flourished based on their access to and dissemination of information. Like the early canals of the Netherlands, fiber optics are the newest arteries of technological and cultural advancement. Thank you for contributing some genuine insight and optimism about where we Americans need to generate more “will” (as you noted so precisely) regarding our infrastructure.

]]> Comment on Municipal worries over FttH in China by Tweets that mention Municipal worries over FttH in China | Dadamotive -- Topsy.com http://www.dadamotive.com/2011/01/municipal-worries-over-ftth-in-china/#comment-51 Tweets that mention Municipal worries over FttH in China | Dadamotive -- Topsy.com Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:17:58 +0000 http://www.dadamotive.com/?p=1829#comment-51 [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by noise36, Bill. Bill said: Municipal worries over FttH in China http://is.gd/wDyVUd #broadband #nbn [...] [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by noise36, Bill. Bill said: Municipal worries over FttH in China http://is.gd/wDyVUd #broadband #nbn [...]

]]> Comment on Backhaul capacity or QoS? by ejecteject http://www.dadamotive.com/2010/11/backhaul-capacity-or-qos/#comment-45 ejecteject Fri, 26 Nov 2010 14:24:38 +0000 http://www.dadamotive.com/?p=1760#comment-45 I understand the logic behind this argument, but unfortunately the mathematics don't really reflect the way a carrier network is built and the way it then has to scale up. When you build a PoP, on day one it doesn't have 10,000 100Mb customers attached to it. Evidently you start at the bottom and provision more bandwidth over time, but the costs of this don't go up in nice smooth increments like you're putting more money in the meter. Providers have to work within the confines of established physical transmission standards. You cannot buy Ethernet optics and wavelengths for a random number between 1Gb and 10Gb and the capex + opex difference is substantial. Bundling multiple 10Gb interfaces can also have it's own headaches, depending on circumstances. Can you give pricing examples for the 'sophisticated equipment' required for QoS for comparison? In my experience 10Gb optics and interface modules will far exceed the cost of QoS on the chassis. I understand the logic behind this argument, but unfortunately the mathematics don’t really reflect the way a carrier network is built and the way it then has to scale up.

When you build a PoP, on day one it doesn’t have 10,000 100Mb customers attached to it. Evidently you start at the bottom and provision more bandwidth over time, but the costs of this don’t go up in nice smooth increments like you’re putting more money in the meter.

Providers have to work within the confines of established physical transmission standards. You cannot buy Ethernet optics and wavelengths for a random number between 1Gb and 10Gb and the capex + opex difference is substantial. Bundling multiple 10Gb interfaces can also have it’s own headaches, depending on circumstances.

Can you give pricing examples for the ‘sophisticated equipment’ required for QoS for comparison? In my experience 10Gb optics and interface modules will far exceed the cost of QoS on the chassis.

]]> Comment on iPad: Club Med for digital tourists by Pontus http://www.dadamotive.com/2010/02/ipad_club_med_for_digital_tourists/#comment-37 Pontus Wed, 03 Feb 2010 11:21:50 +0000 http://dadamotive.local/2010/02/ipad_club_med_for_digital_tourists/#comment-37 Amen! Pontus 67 Amen! Pontus 67

]]> Comment on Congestion Neutrality in practice by opticalgirl http://www.dadamotive.com/2009/12/congestion_neutrality_in_practice/#comment-36 opticalgirl Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:22:42 +0000 http://dadamotive.local/2009/12/congestion_neutrality_in_practice/#comment-36 Transparency is a good thing, however... there is another page that merits a look. It tells you your expected speeds, and it turns out that almost everything is rate limited: <a href="http://www.plus.net/support/broadband/speed_guide/download_speeds.shtml#valueSpeeds" rel="nofollow">http://www.plus.net/support/broadband/speed_guide/download_speeds.shtml#valueSpeeds</a> OK, I admit I'm on the cheapskate package with PlusNet, but that type of package has been fine since I first got broadband in 2002 - until now. These rate limits just seem to be an excuse to extract more money from customers like me. I'm a light user, and not even that impatient - but this is not funny. From lunchtime onwards, I can't download at any speed over 1 Mbps, even though my router says I'm connected at 8 Mbps. This is a big deal because it affects me when I download new drivers or software, which I've been doing a lot of as I recently changed PC. Who wants to wait 45 minutes to download Firefox, or 2 hours to receive a 30 minute audio file? I was aware of the traffic prioritisation when I signed up for the service, but not the rate limits. Perhaps this is a new policy. At any rate, these limits are so low that it puts me back into the stone age. That's not my idea of a good ISP. Transparency is a good thing, however… there is another page that merits a look. It tells you your expected speeds, and it turns out that almost everything is rate limited: http://www.plus.net/support/broadband/speed_guide/download_speeds.shtml#valueSpeeds OK, I admit I’m on the cheapskate package with PlusNet, but that type of package has been fine since I first got broadband in 2002 – until now. These rate limits just seem to be an excuse to extract more money from customers like me. I’m a light user, and not even that impatient – but this is not funny. From lunchtime onwards, I can’t download at any speed over 1 Mbps, even though my router says I’m connected at 8 Mbps. This is a big deal because it affects me when I download new drivers or software, which I’ve been doing a lot of as I recently changed PC. Who wants to wait 45 minutes to download Firefox, or 2 hours to receive a 30 minute audio file? I was aware of the traffic prioritisation when I signed up for the service, but not the rate limits. Perhaps this is a new policy. At any rate, these limits are so low that it puts me back into the stone age. That’s not my idea of a good ISP.

]]> Comment on Why Capitalism depends on Net Neutrality by Clay Barham http://www.dadamotive.com/2009/12/why_capitalism_depends_on_net_neutrality/#comment-35 Clay Barham Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:07:55 +0000 http://dadamotive.local/2009/12/why_capitalism_depends_on_net_neutrality/#comment-35 EPA AND DUE DILIGENCE When someone is to invest in a new enterprise, or brokers start up an Initial Public Offering, a thorough due diligence is done. That means a good, deep investigation of who the enterprise is to serve, how they produce the service, financials, where, and what impact it has on the environment and the legal system, as well as rational estimates of profitability. In most cases, if the start-up is something new, the market for the service is as speculative as a new TV series entertainment executives think will do well. Each of the segments of the due diligence is important to the investor, and the speculative may be of interest to the gambler. But, when probable government actions are input, such as new EPA regulations, energy use, cost, allocation and emissions of carbon dioxide, the risk becomes too great for the investor. If the government acts in such ways to increase the risks to an investor in any new business, the economy is confronted with a major crippling virus. Keep in mind, new and small business accounts for close to three out of four jobs in our economy. New, small, innovative, privately owned small business is the reason America has been so prosperous, and lack of them is the reason other nations in the world are not prosperous. It sounds like our government is rushing to shut America down in order to keep the world’s playing field level. Claybarham.com EPA AND DUE DILIGENCE When someone is to invest in a new enterprise, or brokers start up an Initial Public Offering, a thorough due diligence is done. That means a good, deep investigation of who the enterprise is to serve, how they produce the service, financials, where, and what impact it has on the environment and the legal system, as well as rational estimates of profitability. In most cases, if the start-up is something new, the market for the service is as speculative as a new TV series entertainment executives think will do well. Each of the segments of the due diligence is important to the investor, and the speculative may be of interest to the gambler. But, when probable government actions are input, such as new EPA regulations, energy use, cost, allocation and emissions of carbon dioxide, the risk becomes too great for the investor. If the government acts in such ways to increase the risks to an investor in any new business, the economy is confronted with a major crippling virus. Keep in mind, new and small business accounts for close to three out of four jobs in our economy. New, small, innovative, privately owned small business is the reason America has been so prosperous, and lack of them is the reason other nations in the world are not prosperous. It sounds like our government is rushing to shut America down in order to keep the world’s playing field level. Claybarham.com

]]> Comment on Congestion Neutrality (2) by Richard Bennett http://www.dadamotive.com/2009/12/congestion_neutrality_2/#comment-34 Richard Bennett Sat, 05 Dec 2009 04:52:01 +0000 http://dadamotive.local/2009/12/congestion_neutrality_2/#comment-34 Herman, you're seriously confused. This is not a matter of emotion, it's a factual matter regarding the claims you've made about TCP that don't happen to be remotely true. In the first place, TCP is an end-to-end protocol which happens to be implemented outside the carrier network; to change the behavior of TCP, you need to alter the implementation in Windows, Linux, and MacOS. The network operator cannot do this, the only control he has is over the packet drop strategy that drives TCP backoff behavior. Most carriers use a tail-drop algorithm inside their first/last mile networks and a WRED at the border router. Neither is user-oriented, they're packet-oriented procedures that simply respond to congestion by dropping packets more or less randomly at or near the point of overload. If carriers want to allocate bandwidth fairly across all users, they will have to buy specialized equipment that goes beyond the TCP spec and implements algorithms that are not defined by the IETF's definition of TCP behavior. Carriers do various things to ensure fair access to network resources, but this is not a part of TCP, it's actually a layer 2 behavior. It is not the case that "overbooking the link is a bad thing." Overbooking the link - which is to say, allowing each user to take advantage of 100% of the link for the duration of each packet - is a good thing, the very capability that makes packet switching more suitable for human/computer interaction than circuit switching. Over-booking is the reason that residential broadband is so much less expensive (and generally faster) than commercial broadband sold according to SLAs. Packet-switching has great economics because it's a statistical system. If each user has dedicated bandwidth, and there's no sharing allowed across the entire pipe, you're back in the circuit-switching world and paying much higher prices to build a network. The problem that arises in provisioning a network is the prediction of the mix of applications, because that guides the models about provisioning and underlies the economics of network operation. And predicting is hard: three years ago, it looked like P2P was going to take over the world, and it demands symmetrical links; but today, streaming is growing much faster, and it works best with asymmetrical ones. So what's the ISP to do? Your analysis of TCP was wrong at the start, and now you're arguing that if TCP were different, it might be fair. But it's not, and the ISP is not the implementer. So just admit you were wrong and we can move on. No emotion, just fact. Herman, you’re seriously confused. This is not a matter of emotion, it’s a factual matter regarding the claims you’ve made about TCP that don’t happen to be remotely true. In the first place, TCP is an end-to-end protocol which happens to be implemented outside the carrier network; to change the behavior of TCP, you need to alter the implementation in Windows, Linux, and MacOS. The network operator cannot do this, the only control he has is over the packet drop strategy that drives TCP backoff behavior. Most carriers use a tail-drop algorithm inside their first/last mile networks and a WRED at the border router. Neither is user-oriented, they’re packet-oriented procedures that simply respond to congestion by dropping packets more or less randomly at or near the point of overload. If carriers want to allocate bandwidth fairly across all users, they will have to buy specialized equipment that goes beyond the TCP spec and implements algorithms that are not defined by the IETF’s definition of TCP behavior. Carriers do various things to ensure fair access to network resources, but this is not a part of TCP, it’s actually a layer 2 behavior. It is not the case that “overbooking the link is a bad thing.” Overbooking the link – which is to say, allowing each user to take advantage of 100% of the link for the duration of each packet – is a good thing, the very capability that makes packet switching more suitable for human/computer interaction than circuit switching. Over-booking is the reason that residential broadband is so much less expensive (and generally faster) than commercial broadband sold according to SLAs. Packet-switching has great economics because it’s a statistical system. If each user has dedicated bandwidth, and there’s no sharing allowed across the entire pipe, you’re back in the circuit-switching world and paying much higher prices to build a network. The problem that arises in provisioning a network is the prediction of the mix of applications, because that guides the models about provisioning and underlies the economics of network operation. And predicting is hard: three years ago, it looked like P2P was going to take over the world, and it demands symmetrical links; but today, streaming is growing much faster, and it works best with asymmetrical ones. So what’s the ISP to do? Your analysis of TCP was wrong at the start, and now you’re arguing that if TCP were different, it might be fair. But it’s not, and the ISP is not the implementer. So just admit you were wrong and we can move on. No emotion, just fact.

]]>