Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
The only reliable way is to measure it inside your network, but there are many good bandwidth measurement sites on the Internet http://www.dslreports.com/stest DSL reports also rates ISPs. http://home.cfl.rr.com/eaa/Bandwidth.htm These tests are not accurate for several reasons, but they can give you an indication. Since they are outside your ISP's control the results do not always reflect your true connectivity. Jack Hodgson wrote: So the (implied) original question: How DO we measure the speed of our connectivity? -- -- Gerald Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston Computer Solutions and Consulting ICQ#156300 PGP Key ID:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
Well, for the engineering types, there is a tool known as sting that can be used to characterize many interresting aspects of your transit link(s). http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/savage/sting/ This is far from point-and-click and not recommended for people that aren't comfortable working with source code. - Marc Jack Hodgson wrote: So the (implied) original question: How DO we measure the speed of our connectivity? * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
!!! cisco router for sale !!!
I have some hardware that i am sure will be of interest to the group routers hubs switches nic etc any offer will be strongly considered as I need to clean up my office they can be seen at: http://www.metrocast.net/~chris3/ email me with questions and offers more items to follow shortly [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanks chris * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: PostgreSQL Vs. MySQL
Quoting Rich Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If you're doing any serious sort of web application my suggestion would be to make it as DB neutral as possible. It makes it a little more painful at first as you can't necessarily make use of feature X of database Y but later on this usually pays off. However as usual YMMV. Everything that I am writing should be as neutral as it possibly can be. For example, I am currently developing a web based CRM utility to do customer management, lead tracking, forcasting, etc. Anything that I develop will be made available to others, so I want to make it as portable as possible. The reason that I ask about the differences is because I am now doing actual db work, and I really don't know anything about them. I am going to use on or the other, since they are open source, and they are readily available. MySQL is what I have started with, just because it was what I had always heard about. Then someone mentioned that they thought I should use PostgreSQL. So, I figured that I would take it to the masses and find out what it is that I don't know. Thanks, Kenny - There's nothing you shouldn't speak of if you've got something to say, and there's no one to be scared of, just get them out of your way. -- The Alarm * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: PostgreSQL Vs. MySQL
My quick rules of thumb: 1: If your data is fairly simple, use MySQL. If your data has complex relationships or you need referential integrity, use PostgreSQL. 2: If you read mostly, use MySQL. If you write frequently, use PostgreSQL. 3: If your queries are simple: select * from a table use MysQL. If you need the power of SQL expressiveness: select * from a table where table.ID in (Select IDs from table2) you need PostgreSQL. All of the above is debatable as to the terms 'fairly simple', 'mostly', 'frequently', etc. YMMV. At present, we use MySQL for close to 100% of our on-line databases. We're starting a new project (customer/order/tech support tracking) that will be PostgreSQL. Ray -- - Raymond Cote, President Appropriate Solutions, Inc. www.AppropriateSolutions.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] 603.924.6079(v) POB 458, Peterborough, NH 03458603.924.8668(f) * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: PostgreSQL Vs. MySQL
On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 12:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't believe that MySQL has support for record locking (I may be wrong) This is correct. and it definitely doesn't handle table joins or secondary indexing very well, There are no foreign keys, however, it seems to handle joins and multiple indexing reasonably well to me. Our database at Pan Am has over 30 tables, several of which are approaching the 1 million mark and it seems to handle it reasonably. Of course, we're way past the point that we need the extra features in PostgreSQL, but haven't had the time to look into migrating. We're still running though. and it doesn't support transactions at all (supposedly they were grafting support for transactions on, but it will be a graft, not native support!). s/were grafting/have grafted/ It's been able to do this for a while now. Haven't ever tried it though. PostgreSQL has all of this. And much more. Some of the features PostgreSQL has that MySQL does not: Views, commit/rollback, row level locking, stored procedures. You should check out the MySQL and PostgreSQL FAQs. I know one of them points to a comparisson list between the two, and figure out which one suits your needs. Couldn't agree with this more. -- If Al Gore invented the Internet, I invented spell check. -- Dan Quayle Cole Tuininga Lead Developer Code Energy, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (603) 766-2208 PGP Key ID: 0x43E5755D * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
RE: Network diagram information
On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 21:51, Mansur, Warren wrote: nmap scans hosts and reports if they are up, and what ports are open. Just a quick question. Does nmap rely on being able to connect to a particular website to download the TCP fingerprints, or are they included with the program when installed? I think it's built in... For some reason I can't seem to use nmap when I'm behind the corporate firewall, even on local nodes. Thanks in advance. My understanding is that nmap uses ICMP requests to figure out the remote OS. Because ICMP is connectionless, if you're Nat'ing, you may have a hard time getting the results back (depending on how the company firewall is configured). -- If Al Gore invented the Internet, I invented spell check. -- Dan Quayle Cole Tuininga Lead Developer Code Energy, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (603) 766-2208 PGP Key ID: 0x43E5755D * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Port Vs. Vulnerability scanners (was Re: Network diagram information)
In a message dated: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 20:33:54 EST Kenneth E. Lussier said: Nessus can do nasty things to a system, and to a network as a whole if it isn't used correctly, wisely, and carefully. Oh, didn't know that. Can you explain a little more about the differences Nessus, on the other hand, is a vulnerability scanner. As part of it's process, it performs a port scan to see what is open. Nessus has the ability to use Nmap as it's plug-in port scanner. Port scaning is just the first step. It scans for open ports, then once it knows what is open, it checks the services that are running. For example, if it finds port 21 open, it will check to see of an ftp server is actually running on that port, and if so, which one. It will then attempt to exploit holes in the given service (buffer overflows, file permissions, anonymous exploits, etc.). If it finds holes, it will tell you what the problems are, and most times, it will tell you how to fix them. Ohh! H, sounds like fun at the very least, but you're right, not the right tool for what I was suggesting :) -- Seeya, Paul God Bless America! If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ...we don't need to be perfect to be the best around, and we never stop trying to be better. Tom Clancy, The Bear and The Dragon * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
RE: Network diagram information
On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Mansur, Warren wrote: Just a quick question. Does nmap rely on being able to connect to a particular website to download the TCP fingerprints, or are they included with the program when installed? AFAIK, nmap is completely self-contained, although I haven't looked at the code. For some reason I can't seem to use nmap when I'm behind the corporate firewall, even on local nodes. There are other things that could interfere. Your system might not have all the right network access support configured (raw sockets and the like), or you might lack sufficient privileges if you are not running as root. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Network diagram information
Thanks for the answers to my question. I guess any question on this forum is sure to promote discussion. It will take a while to research all the information given. Thanks again Jim McGlaughlin * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Network diagram information
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jim McGlaughlin wrote: I guess any question on this forum is sure to promote discussion. Likely so. This can generally be considered a Good Thing. :-) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: PostgreSQL Vs. MySQL
Got a lot of messages ahead of me and someone may have already posted this. See the analysis done by Tim GeoCrawler Perdue: http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/tim2705.php3?page=1 Tim was one of the guys doing the heavy lifting that brought Sourceforge.net into being. ccb * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
RE: Network diagram information
Quoting Mansur, Warren [EMAIL PROTECTED]: nmap scans hosts and reports if they are up, and what ports are open. Just a quick question. Does nmap rely on being able to connect to a particular website to download the TCP fingerprints, or are they included with the program when installed? For some reason I can't seem to use nmap when I'm behind the corporate firewall, even on local nodes. Nmap is completely self contained. It doesn't depend on anything other than it's own built-in code. If you are having trouble, there are a lot of things that can effect it. To have access to all of the features, you need to be logged in as root. Also, if you are scanning a system that is inside of the network, and all of the traffic is going through a switch, the switch may be effecting it. Try slowing down the speed of the scan, and randomizing the port order. Also, shut off ICMP ping, tcp ping, and ping host before scanning. It is possible that a switch or firewall will block these things. If you are truing to scan a system ouside of the firewall, then it is most likly being blocked. FYI, Kenny - There's nothing you shouldn't speak of if you've got something to say, and there's no one to be scared of, just get them out of your way. -- The Alarm * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Jack Hodgson wrote: But that doesn't mean there isn't a good reason to try and measure that service. True. So the (implied) original question: How DO we measure the speed of our connectivity? The only consistent measurement you can make is from your house to the point before concentration -- that is, before your traffic is aggregated with everyone else's. That requires the cooperation of your ISP, and will likely show that the data rate of your local line is exactly what they say it is. The problems usually lie beyond that. Okay, so what about inconsistent measurements? You can make periodic measurements of your connectivity to various points on the Internet, yielding averages which can at least indicate the general quality of service (QoS). These measurements are likely to change over time, as the ISP adds subscribers and/or reconfigures their network. There is also nothing to say that the guy in the next town over will see the same QoS that you do. However, given enough data, you can build a good overall picture. The hard part is collecting enough data. This is not as simple as a utility you can run once. Nor will the data be meaningful as individual measurements. Only after analysis of many measurements taken for many subscribers over a long period of time will you get valid results. To make matters even *more* interesting, the quality of an Internet connection involves more than simple bandwidth. Latency (delay) and availability (packet loss; downtime) are also important. Latency is often overlooked when looking at network performance, but it has a huge impact on interactive applications -- and other than sucking large files for download, most things can be classified as interactive. Okay, so, if you want to actually run tests, the general methodology will go something like this: It will involve sending various sized ICMP Echo Request (ping) packets to various points on the Internet. By using multiple points on the Internet, you can see the effect of routing quirks and down or overloaded systems. By using multiple subscribers, you can see the effect of exceptionally bad lines or host problems. By doing it over time, you can see the effect of variations in subscriber demand. Looking at RTT (round trip time) for small packets will give you a good idea of latency. Looking at route traces will give you a good idea of routing efficiency to points on the Internet. Looking at RTT differences for different packet sizes will allow you to extrapolate effective bandwidth. By looking at how many packets are lost, and when, you can get an idea of the availability of service. I know it would be nice if you could just look a speedometer and find out how fast your Internet connection is, but such a number would be misleading at best, if not outright wrong. Keep in mind this is how you would get generally useful numbers, which is what the OP was asking for. If you have a specific application you are interested in -- say, downloading ISO images from linuxiso.org -- that is much easier to test. Simply go and download them, and look at your throughput. The more specific you are willing to make your requirements, the easier benchmarks become. Of course, that also means your benchmarks are proportionally less useful to others. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: PostgreSQL Vs. MySQL
I've been looking into this recently, as I really wanted transaction support for my database. However, given my web hosting situation, it's much easier to run MySQL. What follows it what I've researched, but haven't actually implemented yet. On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 09:39:31PM -0500, Rich Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Correct, if memory serves me when MySQL does a write it does a whole table lock (or was that a whole DB lock, can't remember). Anyway, it's very quick at reads, at the expense of writes. There are other limitations of MySQL, for instance no sub-select (select * from table where field in (select * from)). To get round this you can sometimes use a join, at other times it requires a temporary table. It also doesn't support commit/rollback - basically if one part of this update fails, roll back any other changes to the previous state. Note that these limitations are being addressed and 4.xx (in alpha ?) supports sub-selects and there is transaction support as well. However the mysql shipped with any distro probably won't have that. MySQL supports additional table types in version 3.23, which is a stable release. These table types have run through a lot of testing, but I believe the table support is not yet at 1.0. The new tables are InnoDB (http://www.innodb.com/, http://www.mysql.com/doc/I/n/InnoDB.html) and Berkeley DB (aka BDB) (http://www.sleepycat.com/, http://www.mysql.com/doc/B/D/BDB.html). These tables are included in the MySQL-Max distribution, or you can ./configure to your pleasure if you are building from source. There's also the Gemini table from NuSphere (http://www.nusphere.com/products/mysqladv.htm) that has been the cause of a big debate over software licenses, trademarks, and domain names (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/12/1453210), which may or may not have been resolved (I saw a note at unixreview.com that said that the debate had been resolved and software released under the GPL, but that the web sites didn't reflect this yet). AFAIK, all these tables support transactions and row-level locking (though I'm not sure about BDB's locking). If you're doing any serious sort of web application my suggestion would be to make it as DB neutral as possible. It makes it a little more painful at first as you can't necessarily make use of feature X of database Y but later on this usually pays off. However as usual YMMV. A note on switching databases: the ease at which you can do so may depend on your programming interface. For instance, I'm using PHP, which unfortunately means that I have separate mysql_*() and pg_*() functions. I'm doing my best to hide this behind another layer of abstraction. Other interfaces like Perl's DBI and Java's JDBC may provide an easier way to move from one database to another. On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 09:40:46AM -0500, Cole Tuininga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 12:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't believe that MySQL has support for record locking (I may be wrong) This is correct. See above. This is dependent on the table type, I believe. On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 11:37:51AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Got a lot of messages ahead of me and someone may have already posted this. See the analysis done by Tim GeoCrawler Perdue: http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/tim2705.php3?page=1 This column is almost 2 years old, and is now rather out-of-date with respect to the current state of these projects. -- Bob BellCompaq Computer Corporation Software Engineer 110 Spit Brook Rd - ZKO3-3/U14 TruCluster GroupNashua, NH 03062-2698 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 603-884-0595 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
I'm not sure that is a good test either. DSL speeds should be consistent between the CO and your house, because you have a dedicated circuit. Broadband speeds can vary depending on traffic on your loop. Good broadband carriers limit the number of subscribers on a single area. (Mediaone used to limit to 300). So testing between the ISP and your home will potentially measure those variations. But, measuring inside the ISP does nothing to measure their connection to the Internet. So, I maintain that testing bandwidth between your system and one of the various bandwidth sites is a reasonable test, but will not point out problems inside of your ISP's local domain. Mediaone used to have a series of files that installers would download to test. These were inside their system. I forget the URL, but they are still used to test newly installed and problem systems. On 18 Feb 2002 at 12:34, Benjamin Scott wrote: On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Jack Hodgson wrote: But that doesn't mean there isn't a good reason to try and measure that service. True. So the (implied) original question: How DO we measure the speed of our connectivity? The only consistent measurement you can make is from your house to the point before concentration -- that is, before your traffic is aggregated with everyone else's. That requires the cooperation of your ISP, and will likely show that the data rate of your local line is exactly what they say it is. The problems usually lie beyond that. Okay, so what about inconsistent measurements? You can make periodic measurements of your connectivity to various points on the Internet, yielding averages which can at least indicate the general quality of service (QoS). These measurements are likely to change over time, as the ISP adds subscribers and/or reconfigures their network. There is also nothing to say that the guy in the next town over will see the same QoS that you do. However, given enough data, you can build a good overall picture. The hard part is collecting enough data. This is not as simple as a utility you can run once. Nor will the data be meaningful as individual measurements. Only after analysis of many measurements taken for many subscribers over a long period of time will you get valid results. To make matters even *more* interesting, the quality of an Internet connection involves more than simple bandwidth. Latency (delay) and availability (packet loss; downtime) are also important. Latency is often overlooked when looking at network performance, but it has a huge impact on interactive applications -- and other than sucking large files for download, most things can be classified as interactive. Okay, so, if you want to actually run tests, the general methodology will go something like this: It will involve sending various sized ICMP Echo Request (ping) packets to various points on the Internet. By using multiple points on the Internet, you can see the effect of routing quirks and down or overloaded systems. By using multiple subscribers, you can see the effect of exceptionally bad lines or host problems. By doing it over time, you can see the effect of variations in subscriber demand. Looking at RTT (round trip time) for small packets will give you a good idea of latency. Looking at route traces will give you a good idea of routing efficiency to points on the Internet. Looking at RTT differences for different packet sizes will allow you to extrapolate effective bandwidth. By looking at how many packets are lost, and when, you can get an idea of the availability of service. I know it would be nice if you could just look a speedometer and find out how fast your Internet connection is, but such a number would be misleading at best, if not outright wrong. Keep in mind this is how you would get generally useful numbers, which is what the OP was asking for. If you have a specific application you are interested in -- say, downloading ISO images from linuxiso.org -- that is much easier to test. Simply go and download them, and look at your throughput. The more specific you are willing to make your requirements, the easier benchmarks become. Of course, that also means your benchmarks are proportionally less useful to others. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * -- Jerry Feldman Portfolio Partner Engineering 508-467-4315 http://www.testdrive.compaq.com/linux/ Compaq Computer Corp. 200
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Jerry Feldman hath spake thusly: I'm not sure that is a good test either. DSL speeds should be consistent between the CO and your house, because you have a dedicated circuit. Broadband speeds can vary depending on traffic on your loop. Good broadband carriers limit the number of subscribers on a single area. (Mediaone used to limit to 300). So testing between the ISP and your home will potentially measure those variations. But, measuring inside the ISP does nothing to measure their connection to the Internet. It occurs to me that when the issue is as complicated as suggested by the fact that so many intelligent people familiar with the topic can't come to an agreement about how to perform meaningful tests, then the results are probably not worth trying to obtain, unless there is a significant investment of $$ tied to the outcome. As DSL and cable provide fairly similar performance (e.g. both substantially faster than dial-up) for fairly similar price, I personally find it's not worth worrying about the differences in performance. Particularly where both tend to be somewhat variable in nature. I'm much more concerned about whether my provider will be around next year. I don't expect ATT to disappear any time soon. Not nearly so sure about Covad and its resellers. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8cU0NdjdlQoHP510RAmJcAJ9JGm6o3tyYODJwJwym10zWj1l0OwCfd9RX zpWk9tA6PwwH0DJ1z6TrC14= =0ZtO -END PGP SIGNATURE- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jerry Feldman wrote: Broadband speeds can vary depending on traffic on your loop. Good point. I was thinking in terms of DSL, which is point-to-point, from subscriber to CO. Cable Internet is a shared medium. There is no way to isolate one subscriber from everyone else. If there is a problem with Cable ISPs over-subscribing their cable data segments, that will affect performance as well. Good broadband carriers limit the number of subscribers on a single area. Of course, if all ISPs were good, we would not be having this discussion. :-) But, measuring inside the ISP does nothing to measure their connection to the Internet. So, I maintain that testing bandwidth between your system and one of the various bandwidth sites is a reasonable test ... The problem with those things is that there are so many variables which can affect them: ISP network quality, immediate ISP demand, route to test server, general Internet conditions, immediate load on test server, latency, packet loss, etc, etc, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Sure, those tests will give you a number, but it does not tell you anything about *why* you got the number you did. If all you want is a warm fuzzy, then sure, go for it. :) But if you want data that actually tells you something about the networks involved, you need more detailed measurements. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
Derek D. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I'm much more concerned about whether my provider will be around next year. I don't expect ATT to disappear any time soon. Not nearly so sure about Covad and its resellers. Bear in mind that some of us wish we had a DSL to compare to... I gave up long ago on Verizontal providing DSL on my exchange (not to mention updating the SLIC box in my neighborhood, 12000 feet from my house). In the meanwhile, Metrocast completely rewired my entire town (36 sq. mi, 4200 people), and brought Cable TV to my house for the first time. (There was no aluminum coax to rip out as none was ever installed). Yes, it's going to be extremely difficult to compare the two. However, I submit that it could be done by making a large number of measurements, by going to many different web sites at many different times of the day and week and taking a composite average. Just my 20 millidollars' worth and unrelated to any opinions my employer might or might not have on the subject... Bayard --- Bayard R. Coolidge N1HODISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed are Compaq Computer Corp. solely those of the author, and not Nashua, New Hampshire, USA those of Compaq Computer Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] (DEC '77-'98) or any other entity. Brake for Moose - It could save your life - N.H. Fish Game Dept. -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GCS/CC d+ s:+ a++ C+++$ UO++$L++$ P L++$ E-@ W+ N++ o- K? w--- O? M? V-- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP- t++ 5? X? R* tv b++ DI+++ D? G e++ h-- r++ y? UF++ -END GEEK CODE BLOCK- --- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
I think the issue is what does the measurement mean, and what is the relevance. To a consumer, the speed of your connection to the ISP is irrelevant (except maybe when uploading web pages to their site or downloading email). To the consumer, it is the measurement of throughput to the Internet. The various Internet bandwidth sites give the consumer a reasonable comparison, especially taken over time. We we all had dialup ISPs, there were issues with shared modems, and the ratio of subscribers to modems. But, beyond that was how well an ISP was connected to the Internet. For years, one of the leading ISPs in the Boston area was able to get away with some relatively low speed connections. The local measurement is only relevant when diagnosing or reporting problems. If my ISP advertises 1.5Mbps (down) I expect to get approximately 1.5Mbps when downloading within that ISP's network, but if I consistently get 600Kbps from several different bandwidth sites, then I think it is time to red flag. On 18 Feb 2002 at 13:50, Derek D. Martin wrote: It occurs to me that when the issue is as complicated as suggested by the fact that so many intelligent people familiar with the topic can't come to an agreement about how to perform meaningful tests, then the results are probably not worth trying to obtain, unless there is a significant investment of $$ tied to the outcome. -- Jerry Feldman Portfolio Partner Engineering 508-467-4315 http://www.testdrive.compaq.com/linux/ Compaq Computer Corp. 200 Forest Street MRO1-3/F1 Marlboro, Ma. 01752 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Bayard Coolidge USG wrote: Bear in mind that some of us wish we had a DSL to compare to... And some of us wish we had something better than a modem which never connects at faster than 26 kilobit/sec :-/ -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Throughput of DSL Internet
If you want to get a quick and dirty estimate of how things are, there is a program called Visual route http://www.visualware.com/visualroute/index.html that does visual traceroutes between two points (yours and the target of your choice.) There is a Linux version (it is java, but bear in mind that it does NOT support the Kaffe VM that comes with RH/Mandrake; you need Sun's or Blackdown's VM (there is a list of supported VMs in the docs.) The trace shows the min/max latencies, and shows a comparison of round trip time at each point in the route. You can connect a DSL node to cable node and just watch for a while...it's pretty interesting, but it probably won't get you any quantitative results. There is no logging, and you won't get any raw throughput data (large file transfer rates.) Rich Cloutier President, C*O SYSTEM SUPPORT SERVICES www.sysupport.com - Original Message - From: Bayard Coolidge USG [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 2:05 PM Subject: Re: Throughput of DSL Internet Derek D. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I'm much more concerned about whether my provider will be around next year. I don't expect ATT to disappear any time soon. Not nearly so sure about Covad and its resellers. Bear in mind that some of us wish we had a DSL to compare to... I gave up long ago on Verizontal providing DSL on my exchange (not to mention updating the SLIC box in my neighborhood, 12000 feet from my house). In the meanwhile, Metrocast completely rewired my entire town (36 sq. mi, 4200 people), and brought Cable TV to my house for the first time. (There was no aluminum coax to rip out as none was ever installed). Yes, it's going to be extremely difficult to compare the two. However, I submit that it could be done by making a large number of measurements, by going to many different web sites at many different times of the day and week and taking a composite average. Just my 20 millidollars' worth and unrelated to any opinions my employer might or might not have on the subject... Bayard --- Bayard R. Coolidge N1HO DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed are Compaq Computer Corp. solely those of the author, and not Nashua, New Hampshire, USA those of Compaq Computer Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] (DEC '77-'98) or any other entity. Brake for Moose - It could save your life - N.H. Fish Game Dept. -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GCS/CC d+ s:+ a++ C+++$ UO++$L++$ P L++$ E-@ W+ N++ o- K? w--- O? M? V-- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP- t++ 5? X? R* tv b++ DI+++ D? G e++ h-- r++ y? UF++ -END GEEK CODE BLOCK- --- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Satelite systems
Hey, With all the talk about about DSL throughput, I'm wondering if anyone out there has any experience with either Dish Network's or DirecTV's satellite internet connectivity offerings. Evidently DirecTV is partnering with the likes of Earthlink, and they're offering *seems* cheaper than Dish Network's. They advertise 400K down/128K up with 1/2 second of latency. How does that compare with DSL/Cable modem? (I know it beats my 56K dialup :) The down side is that it costs a little more than I want it to: $399up front satellite dish cost $199installation costs $69.95/monthservice charge Currently I'm paying $21.95/month for 56K dial-up service + $23.xx for a second phone line. So even after the up front costs of buying a dish and installation, I'd still be paying $25/month more than I am now :( Of course, $25/month extra would probably be worth it for the always on capability. Does anyone have satellite access out there? If so, what do you think about it? -- Seeya, Paul God Bless America! If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ...we don't need to be perfect to be the best around, and we never stop trying to be better. Tom Clancy, The Bear and The Dragon * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
I have posted to this ist before on the topic, so you may want to look through the archives. I have use StarBand (aka Dish) for over a year. Throughput has gotten progressively worse as subscribership has climbed. Latency is always at least 600ms. If you aren't running win32 you should think twice. The service providers are forcing this more and more in their accelerator technology, and as hard as I have tried to penetrate their developement group to help with their BST protocol, I have not succeeded. I have however created my own BST-like replacement. In general I'd say that it has served my needs sufficiently, but at this stage, unless I see something change in their scaling model soon, I would not recommend people consider it. Your modem will have better throughput unless you are using the BST protocol, and even then, interactive sessions may not be tollerable. I would instead recommend a grass-roots effort to get an 802.11[ab] coop operating in the region. Anyone _seriously_ interrested in making this happen is invited to contact me, and I will introduce you to others that I am working with to make this a reality. - Marc On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Paul Lussier wrote: Hey, With all the talk about about DSL throughput, I'm wondering if anyone out there has any experience with either Dish Network's or DirecTV's satellite internet connectivity offerings. Evidently DirecTV is partnering with the likes of Earthlink, and they're offering *seems* cheaper than Dish Network's. They advertise 400K down/128K up with 1/2 second of latency. How does that compare with DSL/Cable modem? (I know it beats my 56K dialup :) The down side is that it costs a little more than I want it to: $399up front satellite dish cost $199installation costs $69.95/monthservice charge Currently I'm paying $21.95/month for 56K dial-up service + $23.xx for a second phone line. So even after the up front costs of buying a dish and installation, I'd still be paying $25/month more than I am now :( Of course, $25/month extra would probably be worth it for the always on capability. Does anyone have satellite access out there? If so, what do you think about it? -- Seeya, Paul God Bless America! If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ...we don't need to be perfect to be the best around, and we never stop trying to be better. Tom Clancy, The Bear and The Dragon * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
Marc Evans should comment on Starband. The people I know who have DirecTV for Internet hate it. I do know several people who have satellite, and the only service that they like is Starband. I'll send you the name of the company that hooked up my friend Larry (who lives in Holland, Ma but might just as well be in Siberia, phone wise) and also who hooked up Marc. On 18 Feb 2002 at 15:26, Paul Lussier wrote: Hey, With all the talk about about DSL throughput, I'm wondering if anyone out there has any experience with either Dish Network's or DirecTV's satellite internet connectivity offerings. Evidently DirecTV is partnering with the likes of Earthlink, and they're offering *seems* cheaper than Dish Network's. They advertise 400K down/128K up with 1/2 second of latency. How does that compare with DSL/Cable modem? (I know it beats my 56K dialup :) The down side is that it costs a little more than I want it to: $399up front satellite dish cost $199installation costs $69.95/monthservice charge Currently I'm paying $21.95/month for 56K dial-up service + $23.xx for a second phone line. So even after the up front costs of buying a dish and installation, I'd still be paying $25/month more than I am now :( Of course, $25/month extra would probably be worth it for the always on capability. Does anyone have satellite access out there? If so, what do you think about it? -- Seeya, Paul God Bless America! If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ...we don't need to be perfect to be the best around, and we never stop trying to be better. Tom Clancy, The Bear and The Dragon * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Associate Director Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Paul Lussier wrote: Does anyone have satellite access out there? If so, what do you think about it? We have a client who signed up with StarBand's two-way satellite Internet service. It generally works, with one major problem: The latency is HORRID. Time to ping the next hop is around 700 or 800 ms. RTT to arbitrary hosts on the Internet is measured in seconds -- I've seen RTTs as high as seven seconds! The problem is one of distance. Say you want to ping your next door neighbor. On landline, your packet might go to your ISP, to their ISP, to a PoP in Boston, maybe to a peering point in New York City, and back down another route to your neighbor's ISP. All in all, between 500 and 2000 miles of copper, worst-case. Geosynchronous orbit is roughly 22,000 miles straight up. Your request has to go 22,000 miles into space, turn around and go 22,000 miles to the ISP's ground-station, travel on the Internet, get processed, return to the ground-station, travel 22,000 miles up, and then 22,000 miles back down to you, for a grand total of almost 100,000 miles. Just to ping. We don't normally think of TCP as an interactive application. Believe me, when you've got latency like that, it is. Web browsing is agonizing. Forget anything like Telnet, SSH, IRC, VoIP, etc. Our client hates it. Unfortunately, they locked themselves into a one-year contract. (They did all this without asking us, of course.) Also, the service is very heavily centered around MS-Windows, and they do some goofy things with routing (like hand out default routes which are unreachable without manual routing table updates). -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
Benjamin Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Geosynchronous orbit is roughly 22,000 miles straight up. Your request has to go 22,000 miles into space, turn around and go 22,000 miles... Actually, it's more like 22,400 miles straight up from the _equator_. The slant range from our neck of the woods (i.e. 42-43 degrees or so north latitude) is going to be significantly greater than that! I'll leave the exact calculations to someone else, but the point is that it's actually going to be a lot worse than Ben's already gloomy news. (OK, granted DirecTV/DirecPC's uplinks might be in south Florida or Colorado or wherever, but those latitudes, and ours, still have to be factored in... In any case, it's not a pretty picture...) I prefer a non-RF approach, generally speaking. One, I'm a ham and the noise floor on our microwave bands is going to get worse as time goes on, and second, it means that fewer people can listen in on my packets :-) Bayard * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
This isn't an answer to make things happen quickly, but a well written complaint to the NH Public Utility Commision by as many people as possible, that have been explicitely turned down by Verizon as not being loop qualified, will probably help. There is currently at least two dockets open in the PUC that this would act as fuel for, and the commisioners would probably like to hear from you. Also, supporting ISPs that are members of the NH ISP Association (www.nhispa.org) may help too, as they are actively fighting through the PUC and other venues to gain access to be able to better provide broadband within the state. - Marc On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Paul Lussier wrote: In a message dated: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 15:53:18 EST Benjamin Scott said: We don't normally think of TCP as an interactive application. Believe me, when you've got latency like that, it is. Web browsing is agonizing. Forget anything like Telnet, SSH, IRC, VoIP, etc. Also, the service is very heavily centered around MS-Windows, and they do some goofy things with routing (like hand out default routes which are unreachable without manual routing table updates). So what I'm hearing is, stay with dial-up :( Okay, next question then, anyone have any ideas on how to get Verizon or ATT to get off their collective behinds and get either DSL or cable-modem access into a town? I currently can not get either service (local CO is *not* equipped for DSL by *anyone* and ATT is not offering cable modem access in my town, which is a former cablevision town!). Seeya, Paul (who is starving for high-speed internet access) * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Paul Lussier wrote: So what I'm hearing is, stay with dial-up :( Believe me, if there was something better than my 26 kilobit part-time dial-up available, I would use it! :-) The only practical options are ISDN and leased lines. ISDN isn't *completely* insane; you can get a dedicated, 24x7, 144 kilobit connection for $200/month or so. Lease lines start at around $300/month for a 56 kilobit feed, and you pay per foot to the CO on the install. Okay, next question then, anyone have any ideas on how to get Verizon or ATT to get off their collective behinds and get either DSL or cable-modem access into a town? Good fscking luck. We don't care. We don't have to. We're The Phone Company. Verizon has no incentive to do anything for you. See my recent tirade about how Verizon owns the local lines *and* offers services over them. The cable situation isn't much better. I don't know what it costs to upgrade a cable plant, but unless they see a reasonable chance of ROI in your community, they won't bother. And they have little to no competition. If you get enough of your community up in arms, and petition the town to throw the cable company out of town, they might take notice -- but I've seen even that fail. I currently can not get either service (local CO is *not* equipped for DSL by *anyone* ... How far are you from your CO (or DLC/SLIC box)? If you are over 18,000 feet or so, DSL is out-of-the-question, regardless. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: This isn't an answer to make things happen quickly, but a well written complaint to the NH Public Utility Commision ... Hah! Through sad, hard personal experience, I know that the NH PUC doesn't give two turds in a box about individual subscribers. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Bayard Coolidge USG wrote: Benjamin Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Geosynchronous orbit is roughly 22,000 miles straight up. Your request has to go 22,000 miles into space, turn around and go 22,000 miles... Actually, it's more like 22,400 miles straight up from the _equator_. The slant range from our neck of the woods (i.e. 42-43 degrees or so north latitude) is going to be significantly greater than that! I'll leave the exact calculations to someone else, but the point is that it's actually going to be a lot worse than Ben's already gloomy news. (OK, granted DirecTV/DirecPC's uplinks might be in south Florida or Colorado or wherever, but those latitudes, and ours, still have to be factored in... In any case, it's not a pretty picture...) Starband has their uplink in Georgia. The results of 60 seconds of 80 byte ping packets without BST to the nearest pingable router are: round-trip min/avg/max = 660.2/1054.0/2046.2 ms I prefer a non-RF approach, generally speaking. One, I'm a ham and the noise floor on our microwave bands is going to get worse as time goes on, and second, it means that fewer people can listen in on my packets :-) Hey Bayard, you mean that you don't like the NSA filter being integral on your ISP feed? ;-) - Marc Bayard * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
Paul Lussier said: how to get Verizon or ATT to get off their collective behinds Frankly, I think getting Verizon to do anything will be extremely difficult. They are losing billions of dollars per year, according to their public statements, and my SWAG is they're not going to be interested in investing in expensive technologies for a limited market. (I know where Paul lives, and his town's not much bigger than mine, and the issues are similar). My opinion is that the reason they are losing billions on paper is that they overbid on the last round of wireless telephone spectra and have a bit of a supply-and-demand issue there to be resolved. They aren't interested in ugrading last-mile infrastructure if they aren't pressured hard to do so. ATT, on the other hand, is under a lot of public scrutiny because of all of the cable systems they now own, the high demand for broadband services at the retail (i.e., Harry Homeowner) level, and pressure from local regulatory agencies - i.e., State PUCs *AND* town governments. Cable TV franchises are generally (at least here in New England) awarded on a _municipal_ level. So, if there are a lot of technically-knowledgeable residents in a given town who want broadband and can't seem to get it, putting pressure on the Board of Selectmen, City Council, etc., does get results. It took a few years, but I raised hell with my town government because the previous cable company (long since bought out) didn't want to cable my road because it was too far out in the boonies, even though I was about the only house among the 40-50 on the road who could get a signal off the air! If your town's cable plant is still aluminum-jacketed coax instead of the newer stuff, perhaps you need to start asking a lot of questions as to _when_, not _if_, they will be upgrading to broadband! Bayard * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: Starband has their uplink in Georgia. The results of 60 seconds of 80 byte ping packets without BST to the nearest pingable router are: round-trip min/avg/max = 660.2/1054.0/2046.2 ms For satellite, I believe the nearest pingable router is in orbit, so that does not include the trip back to Earth, or the return journey. (I could be wrong on this.) Can you provide more information on BST? Or links to same? Since we do have a client stuck with it, I am interested. All I could discover about their proprietary software was that it was very proprietary. :-/ -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
With satellite, you are going to be stuck with the latency. Some of the sattelite systems have a dialup component, and others, like Starband are two-way. A friend of mine in Nebraska found an ISP that provides wireless. Does ATT give any estimates as to when Cable Internet will be available. Another possibility is ISDN(a bit better than dialup). Verizon has been very slow to set up tarrifs that make this cost effective. Marc's recommendation to set up a community to share a high speed connection via wireless might be workable. Essentially, this is how cable TV got started. On 18 Feb 2002 at 15:56, Paul Lussier wrote: In a message dated: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 15:53:18 EST Benjamin Scott said: We don't normally think of TCP as an interactive application. Believe me, when you've got latency like that, it is. Web browsing is agonizing. Forget anything like Telnet, SSH, IRC, VoIP, etc. Also, the service is very heavily centered around MS-Windows, and they do some goofy things with routing (like hand out default routes which are unreachable without manual routing table updates). So what I'm hearing is, stay with dial-up :( Okay, next question then, anyone have any ideas on how to get Verizon or ATT to get off their collective behinds and get either DSL or cable-modem access into a town? I currently can not get either service (local CO is *not* equipped for DSL by *anyone* and ATT is not offering cable modem access in my town, which is a former cablevision town!). Seeya, Paul (who is starving for high-speed internet access) * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * -- Jerry Feldman Portfolio Partner Engineering 508-467-4315 http://www.testdrive.compaq.com/linux/ Compaq Computer Corp. 200 Forest Street MRO1-3/F1 Marlboro, Ma. 01752 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Benjamin Scott wrote: How far are you from your CO (or DLC/SLIC box)? If you are over 18,000 feet or so, DSL is out-of-the-question, regardless. True for Verizon ADSL. There are however manufacturers of xDSL equipment that is working to 26000 feet today, that other providers may be willing and able to utilize. The DLC/SLC issue is a far bigger problem, because from a cost of deployment prespective for the provider, the more of these devices that they need to work through, the lower their rate of investment return, in many cases. That is changing though. - Marc * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Benjamin Scott wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: This isn't an answer to make things happen quickly, but a well written complaint to the NH Public Utility Commision ... Hah! Through sad, hard personal experience, I know that the NH PUC doesn't give two turds in a box about individual subscribers. I too have been parts of battles through the NH PUC over several years now. While I agree that _individuals_ are not often heard, the system does pay good attension to larger groups. It doesn't happen quickly, and the end result is usually not what any one of the parties desired. Getting the Office of Consumer Advocate working with your group can be a big win. Remember, this is a political arena, and you need to play it as such... - Marc * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Benjamin Scott wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: Starband has their uplink in Georgia. The results of 60 seconds of 80 byte ping packets without BST to the nearest pingable router are: round-trip min/avg/max = 660.2/1054.0/2046.2 ms For satellite, I believe the nearest pingable router is in orbit, so that does not include the trip back to Earth, or the return journey. (I could be wrong on this.) In the case of starband, the (minimal) routing that can be done in the sky is highly filtered. In fact, it is more like layer-2 switching. My experiment actually is believed to be hitting the third router that the packet passes through, based on TTL. All others closer are highly filtered. Can you provide more information on BST? Or links to same? Since we do have a client stuck with it, I am interested. All I could discover about their proprietary software was that it was very proprietary. :-/ There is a draft RFC for the protocol. The Win32 version is known to run to some semi-useful degree under WINE. Looking through the starband news groups on dejanews can be somewhat useful. As for your customer, a quick and dirty solution would be to setup their gateway as a SOCKS proxy that sends everything through a UDP connection to a proxy-like server that you place at a colo space. Avoid TCP. For bonus points, use forward error correction, payload compression, and IP header compression. Essentially, anything to make the data stream instead of chat, and reduce payload size and retransmits. - Marc -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: How far are you from your CO (or DLC/SLIC box)? If you are over 18,000 feet or so, DSL is out-of-the-question, regardless. The DLC/SLC issue is a far bigger problem ... It can also be an advantage. I live something like 9 miles (almost 50,000 feet) from the CO. However, my lines come out of a SLIC hut less than 6,000 feet from my house. When Vitts Networks was still in business, they used something they called IDSL. It was apparently an ISDN line hacked into working like DSL. It was limited to 144 kilobits/sec, but it was much cheaper than standard ISDN, and it did not require any special equipment at the SLIC station (other than a standard ISDN card). -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
Another possibility is ISDN(a bit better than dialup). Verizon has been very slow to set up tarrifs that make this cost effective. ISDN isn't bad, it's not DSL or cable level bandwidth, but it is a hell of a lot better than analog phone lines. The trick is of course to use Data over Voice to your ISP using a local number, otherwise 24x7 access costs around $1600 a month in ISDN charges! --rdp -- Rich Payne http://talisman.mv.com * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Benjamin Scott wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: How far are you from your CO (or DLC/SLIC box)? If you are over 18,000 feet or so, DSL is out-of-the-question, regardless. The DLC/SLC issue is a far bigger problem ... It can also be an advantage. I live something like 9 miles (almost 50,000 feet) from the CO. However, my lines come out of a SLIC hut less than 6,000 feet from my house. When Vitts Networks was still in business, they used something they called IDSL. It was apparently an ISDN line hacked into working like DSL. It was limited to 144 kilobits/sec, but it was much cheaper than standard ISDN, and it did not require any special equipment at the SLIC station (other than a standard ISDN card). Correct. The 2 B channels (64k each) and the D channel (16k) are passed through the SLC just like they would be for ISDN, but on the ends the equipment doesn't require any ISDN signaling. Some companies will offer PPP through this, which with compression (both VJ and payload) can result in a very nice line configuration. - Marc * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
That is a service sometimes referred to as IDSL. Several DSL providers offered this to clients who were outside of the standard DSL areas. IMHO, DSL is an interim strategy. It is a way for the phone companies to utilize existing copper technology. Verizon (nee Bell Titanic, nee Nynex, nee New England Telephone) tariffed ISDN to the point where it was out of the reach of local subscribers until it was too late. These companies (the not so baby bells) are very large, top heavy, businesses with a long history of being the phone monopoly. Currently the cable TV guys can supply analog and digital TV, digital phone service, and Internet both to homes and to businesses. Verizon also has serious problems because they must also provide switching services. On 18 Feb 2002 at 16:36, Benjamin Scott wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: How far are you from your CO (or DLC/SLIC box)? If you are over 18,000 feet or so, DSL is out-of-the-question, regardless. The DLC/SLC issue is a far bigger problem ... It can also be an advantage. I live something like 9 miles (almost 50,000 feet) from the CO. However, my lines come out of a SLIC hut less than 6,000 feet from my house. When Vitts Networks was still in business, they used something they called IDSL. It was apparently an ISDN line hacked into working like DSL. It was limited to 144 kilobits/sec, but it was much cheaper than standard ISDN, and it did not require any special equipment at the SLIC station (other than a standard ISDN card). -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * -- Jerry Feldman Portfolio Partner Engineering 508-467-4315 http://www.testdrive.compaq.com/linux/ Compaq Computer Corp. 200 Forest Street MRO1-3/F1 Marlboro, Ma. 01752 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
Um, am I reading this right? When I move out of Nashua I'm stuck with dialup again? I've already got ATT Broadband Internet. I'm not thrilled with it, but it works... -Mike- On Monday 18 February 2002 09:15 pm, Jerry Feldman wrote: snip Does ATT give any estimates as to when Cable Internet will be available. _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: There is a draft RFC for the protocol. The Win32 version is known to run to some semi-useful degree under WINE. Looking through the starband news groups on dejanews can be somewhat useful. Indeed. For those too lazy to look, here is some information: BST = Boosted Session Transport. It appears to be a inline TCP proxy designed to optimize TCP sessions for high-latency, unreliable links (like satellite and some wireless). Despite the RFC draft, it appears to be a proprietary, patented protocol owned by a company named FlashNetworks, and sold under the name of NettGain. http://www.flash-networks.com/Product.asp?table=Providers http://www.globecom.net/ietf/draft/draft-azmak-bst-00.html StarBand used to offer a model 180 satellite modem which did something kinda-sorta like BST, but in the modem itself. They have replaced the 180 with a model 360 (which our customers have), and moved all that into software running on Windows (NettGain). Some discussion here: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=BST+group:alt.satellite.starband+group:alt.satellite.starbandhl=enselm=cq5g7.5214%24Qh2.1319535%40typhoon.san.rr.comrnum=5 Of note, FlashNetworks does have a Linux NettGain client. However, apparently StarBand and Microsoft are in bed together, and thus StarBand has not purchased a license for the Linux client. But even if BST was an open standard and readily available for Linux, I suspect the latency problem would still make itself felt for many applications, especially anything like SSH (which, of course, I use extensively at home). -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
True. Ziplink, the ISP in Lowell, at one time had a very extensive set of web pages on ISDN and how to order it. ISDN (for consumer use) is broken up into 3 channels: 2 are 64K and the third is for control. You can bind the 2 64K channels into one for an effective 128K. DOVB, I think, is limited to 56K, but it is a digital bidirectional 56K where you analog 56K is never going to be above 50 (on a dialup), and it's assymetrical. Before you order ISDN, check with the ISP on their recommendations. When ordering ISDN, the phone company used to be clueless. On 18 Feb 2002 at 16:43, Rich Payne wrote: Another possibility is ISDN(a bit better than dialup). Verizon has been very slow to set up tarrifs that make this cost effective. ISDN isn't bad, it's not DSL or cable level bandwidth, but it is a hell of a lot better than analog phone lines. The trick is of course to use Data over Voice to your ISP using a local number, otherwise 24x7 access costs around $1600 a month in ISDN charges! --rdp -- Rich Payne http://talisman.mv.com -- Jerry Feldman Portfolio Partner Engineering 508-467-4315 http://www.testdrive.compaq.com/linux/ Compaq Computer Corp. 200 Forest Street MRO1-3/F1 Marlboro, Ma. 01752 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jerry Feldman wrote: Currently the cable TV guys can supply analog and digital TV, digital phone service, and Internet both to homes and to businesses. Yah, and then instead of The Phone Company, we will have The Broadband Company. Except many of those companies also have media production and distribution interests -- the same ones who are behind the DMCA, the DVD CCA CSS lawsuits, and the SSSCA. Out of the toilet, into the sewer... -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jerry Feldman wrote: When ordering ISDN, the phone company used to be clueless. Still is. Definitely contact the potential ISDN ISP, since requirements vary depending on the exact configuration. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jerry Feldman wrote: True. Ziplink, the ISP in Lowell, at one time had a very extensive set of web pages on ISDN and how to order it. ISDN (for consumer use) is broken up into 3 channels: 2 are 64K and the third is for control. You can bind the 2 64K channels into one for an effective 128K. DOVB, I think, is limited to 56K, but it is a digital bidirectional 56K where you analog 56K is never going to be above 50 (on a dialup), and it's assymetrical. and most ISDN devices support bonding those two together for 112K, which isn't bad. Before you order ISDN, check with the ISP on their recommendations. When ordering ISDN, the phone company used to be clueless. Yeah, they're still pretty bad. FWIW I actually have VISDN (Virtual ISDN) as the switch in Jaffrey can't handle ISDN, so my local calling area for the ISDN numbers is Keene. A little funky at times but works fairly well none the less. It's gone out a couple of times...but usually fixed fairly quickly. The big problem is if it fails on the weekends, when the ISDN people don't work! --rdp On 18 Feb 2002 at 16:43, Rich Payne wrote: Another possibility is ISDN(a bit better than dialup). Verizon has been very slow to set up tarrifs that make this cost effective. ISDN isn't bad, it's not DSL or cable level bandwidth, but it is a hell of a lot better than analog phone lines. The trick is of course to use Data over Voice to your ISP using a local number, otherwise 24x7 access costs around $1600 a month in ISDN charges! --rdp -- Rich Payne http://talisman.mv.com -- Jerry Feldman Portfolio Partner Engineering 508-467-4315 http://www.testdrive.compaq.com/linux/ Compaq Computer Corp. 200 Forest Street MRO1-3/F1 Marlboro, Ma. 01752 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * -- Rich Payne http://talisman.mv.com * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
This is true. ATT BB bought Mediaone (which was previopusly owned by US West). However, the broadband companies, which still large companies, are still much less bureaucratic than the phone companies. They all developed from smaller cable companies, such as Continental CableVistion, or Cox (a broadcast and newpaper media company), Time Warner, etc. On 18 Feb 2002 at 17:10, Benjamin Scott wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jerry Feldman wrote: Currently the cable TV guys can supply analog and digital TV, digital phone service, and Internet both to homes and to businesses. Yah, and then instead of The Phone Company, we will have The Broadband Company. Except many of those companies also have media production and distribution interests -- the same ones who are behind the DMCA, the DVD CCA CSS lawsuits, and the SSSCA. Out of the toilet, into the sewer... -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Associate Director Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
- Original Message - From: Benjamin Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Greater NH Linux Users' Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 4:18 PM Subject: Re: Satelite systems On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Marc Evans wrote: Starband has their uplink in Georgia. The results of 60 seconds of 80 byte ping packets without BST to the nearest pingable router are: round-trip min/avg/max = 660.2/1054.0/2046.2 ms For satellite, I believe the nearest pingable router is in orbit, so that does not include the trip back to Earth, or the return journey. (I could be wrong on this.) I believe you are [wrong;] the satellite is merely a repeater at the physical layer. Rich Cloutier President, C*O SYSTEM SUPPORT SERVICES www.sysupport.com * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Satelite systems
Has anyone seen the Robert X Cringley site? He's doing stuff w/ 802.11b. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010712.html The synopsis: he's using satellite can't get DSL or Cable modem. So he finds someone (using a telescope) that can get DSL, gets *them* a connection, then uses 802.11b (WiFi) with some directional antennas to connect to the DSL. He's got some further info on using a booster antenna to go around an obstacle hooking into a Starbucks' wireless LAN. There are also some groups trying to do community 802.11b networks in Cambridge and Londonderry, NH. I forgot the web site :-( This kind of stuff with NAT firewalls has some of the cable DSL companies upset. -- --- Tom Buskey * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Console security (was: Humor: NT and security)
Okay, as requested -- after having a little fun anonymizing this email flameware from about six years ago, I've posted it at http://www.linuxlobbyist.org/rpdebate/ for a limited time. There may be traces of stuff I've missed in my sed script, but it should be enough to protect the innocent (and the guilty). On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 05:57:05PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 16:44:29 EST Paul Iadonisi said: The problem was the way I worded my initial edict. ;-) It was a classic conversation. Even if I wasn't such a pakrat, I still would have saved it for posterity. Well, don't keep us in suspense, Paul, share! At least with me privately ;) -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Console security (was: Humor: NT and security)
And attached is the cast of characters. On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 06:20:14PM -0500, Paul Iadonisi wrote: Okay, as requested -- after having a little fun anonymizing this email flameware from about six years ago, I've posted it at http://www.linuxlobbyist.org/rpdebate/ for a limited time. There may be traces of stuff I've missed in my sed script, but it should be enough to protect the innocent (and the guilty). On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 05:57:05PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 16:44:29 EST Paul Iadonisi said: The problem was the way I worded my initial edict. ;-) It was a classic conversation. Even if I wasn't such a pakrat, I still would have saved it for posterity. Well, don't keep us in suspense, Paul, share! At least with me privately ;) -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets Frodo Baggins: Valiant System Administrator Bilbo Baggins: Another System Administrator #1 Arwen: Another System Administrator #2 Everard Proudfoot: Another System Administrator #3 Gandalf:Boss of Valiant System Administrator Elrond: Boss of boss of Valiant System Administrator Gimli: Network Administrator Sam:A reasonable Developer Gil-Gilad: A reasonable Release Engineer Legolas:A reasonable Development Manager Boromir:A reasonable Customer Support Rep. Sauron: Evil Development Manager #1 Lurtz: Evil Development Manager #2 Farmer Maggot: Evil Development Manager #4 Elendil:So-so Business Unit Manager Gollum: Another System Administrator #4 Aragorn:Another Developer #1 Bounder:Random participant #1 Mrs. Proudfoot: Random participant #2 Haldir: Random participant #3 Rosie Cotton: Another Developer #2 Merry: Another Developer #3 Isildur:Phone and Facilities Administrator Saruman:Another System Administrator #5 Galadriel: Another Developer #4 Pippin: Another Developer #5 Barliman Butterbur: Another System Administrator #6
Re: Console security (was: Humor: NT and security)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Paul Iadonisi hath spake thusly: Okay, as requested -- after having a little fun anonymizing this email flameware from about six years ago, I've posted it at http://www.linuxlobbyist.org/rpdebate/ for a limited time. There may be traces of stuff I've missed in my sed script, but it should be enough to protect the innocent (and the guilty). That was amusing, and remeniscent of some of the battles that I (and Paul) have gone through in the past. Thanks! :) So, should we start calling you Frodo now? =8^) - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8cZVbdjdlQoHP510RAnpgAJ9zZUzMemwUyOCvz0jaQdFVYxd5egCfeO8Z m2BOrXapumMmKv9S2Fb3V9s= =dj6l -END PGP SIGNATURE- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Boston Linux Meeting Wednesday, February 20, 2002
When: February 20, 2002 Topic: Introduction to IBM AIX Presented by Daoud Noble Location: MIT Building 6-120 (Note: Another room change. We should be here for the next few months) An introduction to AIX, IBM's flavor of Unix, and how it differs from other flavors such as Solaris, GNU/Linux, and the BSDs. -- Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Console security (was: Humor: NT and security)
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote: Okay, as requested -- after having a little fun anonymizing this email flameware from about six years ago, I've posted it at http://www.linuxlobbyist.org/rpdebate/ for a limited time. There may be traces of stuff I've missed in my sed script, but it should be enough to protect the innocent (and the guilty). *chuckle* I like your choice of pseudonyms. :-) But that's downright mild compared to the flamewar GNHLUG had over who should have root passwords. That was before mail-archive.com, though, so I don't know if it still exists anywhere. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Console security (was: Humor: NT and security)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Benjamin Scott hath spake thusly: On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote: But that's downright mild compared to the flamewar GNHLUG had over who should have root passwords. That was before mail-archive.com, though, so I don't know if it still exists anywhere. No one should ever have the root password. Not even the admins... ;-) I particularly enjoyed the know your system administrator guide. And I can put familiar faces on several of the characters. Right Paul? [Er, Lussier, since there are so many Pauls here now.] - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8ceKPdjdlQoHP510RAskVAJ0bKFORCuTFrHJkQgwtIkDLcPP7ugCgpE61 LR9b46Lj0bLfaHiuiGJatZc= =YabB -END PGP SIGNATURE- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
