Well, way off topic, heat pumps are a step in a better direction than
expensive space heaters, particularly for kids in public housing.
Fiber wave-guides are low energy, too compared to all other wave guides
and better than free space as function of distance.
I don't think there is a
assuming a single floor house with lose insulation in the attic
now look at a multi-story place where there isn't an attic, or one with trusses
so that moving around the attic is hard, or a SIP cealing, cathedral cealings,
etc.
but my initial comment on ROI and refitting cost was actually
Retrofit is trivial. It's all in the attic. A romex splice is about $53.
Verticals aren't required.
Many states are mandating per each sale. I had to do this in Boston historic
district. No grandfather. My fire hurts the entire street
Bob
On Oct 18, 2023, 7:05 PM, at 7:05 PM, David Lang
On Wed, 18 Oct 2023, Robert McMahon wrote:
It's $428 per ac ceiling mount hardwired device, no verticals. It's $503 per
vertical for rg6 with patch n paint, internal walls only.
The asset value add for a rg6 jack is basically zero. The asset value add for whole
home, life support capable,
It's $428 per ac ceiling mount hardwired device, no verticals. It's $503 per
vertical for rg6 with patch n paint, internal walls only.
The asset value add for a rg6 jack is basically zero. The asset value add for
whole home, life support capable, future proof, low power, structured fiber &
On Sat, 14 Oct 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
On being unleashed, I think this applies to consumer electronics too. Not
sure why HDMI class cables will be needed. WiFi 7 is spec'd at 16 MIMO radios
at 45Gb/s per front end module. Add some hw compression/decompression, I
think it can carry even HDMI
Hi Sebastian,
On being unleashed, I think this applies to consumer electronics too.
Not sure why HDMI class cables will be needed. WiFi 7 is spec'd at 16
MIMO radios at 45Gb/s per front end module. Add some hw
compression/decompression, I think it can carry even HDMI Utlra High
Speed or 8K.
Hi Bob,
> On Oct 13, 2023, at 19:20, rjmcmahon wrote:
>
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> It was the ISP tech support over the phone. Trying to help install a home
> network over the phone w/o a technician isn't easy.
[SM] Ah, okay. I would never even think about calling my ISP when
considering
As an open-source maintainer of iperf 2, which is basically a network
socket & traffic tool, I find this history extremely interesting.
Releasing a measurement tool free to all, with transparent code, allows
everyone access to a "shared yardstick." While maybe not enough,
hopefully, it helps a
Good point -- "How would I know if an installation was meeting the specs?"
It *has* been done before. From a historical perspective...
When TCPV4 was being defined and documented in RFCs (e.g., RFC 793),
circa 1981, other activities were happening in the administrative
bureaucracy of the US
Hi Sebastian,
Sun workstations targeted engineers, many were sw engineers, who used
the hardware to write sw for their workstations which was critical to
success of the hardware & company. Sun was likely the very first open
source company. Then hardware became more of a commodity where free
Hi Sebastian,
It was the ISP tech support over the phone. Trying to help install a
home network over the phone w/o a technician isn't easy.
In many U.S. states, smoke detectors are required to be no more that 30'
apart, must be AC powered, battery backed up and must communicate with
one
That's interesting. It's basically saying the security risk is openwrt sw. The
chips themselves aren't, and signal processing is not either.
I'll add that to FiWi's remote radio head argument, i.e. it's inherently more
secure. Security is a huge problem for everyone.
Bob
On Oct 13, 2023,
Jack Haverty said:
> A few days ago I made some comments about the idea of "educating" the
> lawyers, politicians, and other smart, but not necessarily technically
> adept, decision makers.
That process might work.
Stanford has run programs on cyber security for congressional staffers.
From
Hi Bob,
> On Oct 13, 2023, at 06:31, rjmcmahon via Nnagain
> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> I think we're looking at different parts of the elephant. I perceive huge
> advances in WiFi (phy, dsp, radios, fems, etc.) and residential gateway chips
> of late. Not sure the state of chips used by the
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
I think we're looking at different parts of the elephant. I perceive huge
advances in WiFi (phy, dsp, radios, fems, etc.) and residential gateway chips
of late.
My point is that the chips behavior doesn't change when you switch to a newer
release of
Hi Bob,
> On Oct 12, 2023, at 17:55, Robert McMahon via Nnagain
> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> The vendors I know don't roll their own os code either. The make their own
> release still mostly based from Linux and they aren't tied to the openwrt
> release process.
>
> I think GUIs on CPEs
Hi David,
I think we're looking at different parts of the elephant. I perceive
huge advances in WiFi (phy, dsp, radios, fems, etc.) and residential
gateway chips of late. Not sure the state of chips used by the openwrt
folks here, though they may be lagging a bit - not sure.
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023, rjmcmahon via Nnagain wrote:
I looked at openwrt packages and iperf 2 is at version 2.1.3 which is a
few years old.
The number of CPE/AP systems to test against is quite large. Then
throwing in versions for backwards compatibility testing adds yet
another vector.
for
I looked at openwrt packages and iperf 2 is at version 2.1.3 which is a
few years old.
The number of CPE/AP systems to test against is quite large. Then
throwing in versions for backwards compatibility testing adds yet
another vector. Since it's performance related, statistical techniques
On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 9:04 AM rjmcmahon via Nnagain
wrote:
>
> Sorry, my openwrt information seems to be incorrect and more vendors use
> openwrt then I realized. So, I really don't know the numbers here.
There are not a lot of choices in the market. On the high end, like
eero, we are seeing
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
Arista's SW VP gave a talk where he said that 80% of their customer calls
about bugs were already fixed but their customer wasn't following an upgrade
policy. This approach applies to most any sw based product.
Yes, there is a big "if it ain't broke
Sorry, my openwrt information seems to be incorrect and more vendors use
openwrt then I realized. So, I really don't know the numbers here.
I do agree with the idea that fixes should be pushed to the mainline and
that incremental upgrades should be standard practice.
Arista's SW VP gave a
Hi David,
The vendors I know don't roll their own os code either. The make their own
release still mostly based from Linux and they aren't tied to the openwrt
release process.
I think GUIs on CPEs are the wrong direction. Consumer network equipment does
best when it's plug and play. Consumers
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
I don't know the numbers but a guess is that a majority of SoCs with WiFi
radios aren't based on openwrt.
From what I've seen, the majority of APs out there are based on OpenWRT or one
of the competing open projects, very few roll their own OS from
-Original Message-
>> From: Nnagain [mailto:nnagain-boun...@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf
>> Of rjmcmahon via Nnagain
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 11:18 AM
>> To: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
>> heard this time!
>> C
HI Dave,
> On Oct 11, 2023, at 20:06, Dave Taht via Nnagain
> wrote:
>
> I think y'all are conflating two different labels here. The nutrition
> label was one effort, now being deploye, the other is cybersecurity,
> now being discussed.
>
> On the nutrition front...
> We successfully fought
-Original Message-
From: rjmcmahon [mailto:rjmcma...@rjmcmahon.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 11:50 AM
To: dick...@alum.mit.edu
Cc: 'Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this
time!'; 'Nick Feamster'
Subject: Re: [NNagain] Internet Education
Hi Jack,
> On Oct 11, 2023, at 19:31, Jack Haverty via Nnagain
> wrote:
>
> A few days ago I made some comments about the idea of "educating" the
> lawyers, politicians, and other smart, but not necessarily technically adept,
> decision makers. Today I saw a news story about a recent FCC
I agree that sw & firmware upgrades are better than big jumps.
I don't know the numbers but a guess is that a majority of SoCs with
WiFi radios aren't based on openwrt. I think many on this list use
openwrt but that may not be representative of the actuals. Also, the
trend is less sw in a CPU
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023, David Bray, PhD via Nnagain wrote:
There's also the concern about how do startups roll-out such a label for
their tech in the early iteration phase? How do they afford to do the extra
work for the label vs. a big company (does this become a regulatory moat?)
And let's say
the technical aspects
heard this time!
Cc: rjmcmahon; Nick Feamster
Subject: Re: [NNagain] Internet Education for Non-technorati?
I've added many metrics around latency and one way delays (OWD) in
iperf
2. There is no single type of latency, nor are the measurements
scalars.
(Few will understand
: [NNagain] Internet Education for Non-technorati?
I've added many metrics around latency and one way delays (OWD) in iperf
2. There is no single type of latency, nor are the measurements scalars.
(Few will understand violin plots or histograms on labels)
On top of that, a paced flow
Are we talking about the one that modelled after the label from CMU (they
showed some prototypes, there would be about 10-15 pieces of information on
the label followed by a QR code to get the rest), here's a link - and the
concerns I have apply to this:
I've added many metrics around latency and one way delays (OWD) in iperf
2. There is no single type of latency, nor are the measurements scalars.
(Few will understand violin plots or histograms on labels)
On top of that, a paced flow will have a different e2e latency histogram
than an as fast
I think y'all are conflating two different labels here. The nutrition
label was one effort, now being deploye, the other is cybersecurity,
now being discussed.
On the nutrition front...
We successfully fought against "packet loss" being included on the
nutrition label, but as ghu is my witness, I
I was at a closed-door event discussing these labels about two weeks ago
(right before the potential government shutdown/temporarily averted for
now) - and it was non-attribution, so I can only describe my comments:
(1) the labels risk missing the reality that the Internet and cybersecurity
are
A few days ago I made some comments about the idea of "educating" the
lawyers, politicians, and other smart, but not necessarily technically
adept, decision makers. Today I saw a news story about a recent FCC
action, to mandate "nutrition labels" on Internet services offered by ISPs:
38 matches
Mail list logo
