Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
Yes, I find it quite amusing that I am paying additional fees on all of my telecommunications services to subsidize high speed PON networks in rural bumf*ck while I can't get anything like it in San Jose, California. That's OK, you're all in the same boat - the subsidized users can't get it either. :) So where are these subsidies going? what a silly question. lining the telcos' pockets. american so called 'broadband' is a joke and a scam. Yup. I'm always shocked by how naive people are; the telcos did a fantastic job on this front. So few people realize what's actually happened. http://www.newnetworks.com/broadbandscandals.htm This is one of the clearest summaries of how we've been taken for hundreds of billions of dollars by telecom companies that promised to provide the Information Superhighway; while it has some clear bias, it is probably the best summarization of how this all went down, and who, why, and how. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again. - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run: If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km. Aled
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
Vitkovsky, Adam (avitkovsky) writes: Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :) You know the shipping cost on a 2 light year thick lead SFP ?
RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
-Original Message- From: Vitkovsky, Adam [mailto:avitkov...@emea.att.com] Sent: 23 March 2012 12:57 To: Aled Morris; Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :) adam Nooo, we just need Interocitors! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interocitor --- Leigh __ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com __
Re: Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
Jared Mauch wrote: It is already a monopoly. Most places are served by one of the utilities: power, telephony or cable. He that controls the outside plant controls your fate. The difference is in how the services can be unbundled. Power is additive (if in phase) that network topology is irrelevant. For telephony, unbundling for DSL at L1 is just fine. So is optical fiber if single star topology is used. WDM PON can still be unbundled at L1. However, with time slotted PON, unbundling must be at L2, which is as expensive as L3, which means there effectively is no unbundling. Or, CLEC may rent a raw fiber at L1 and operate its own PON. However, as CLEC has less customer density to share the fiber than ILEC, CLEC's fiber cost per customer is higher than that of ILEC, which is why PON promotes local monopoly. Masataka Ohta
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:53:45 +0100, Eugen Leitl said: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/122989-1-5-billion-the-cost-of-cutting-london-toyko-latency-by-60ms Lower latency is good... The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well. pgpf7PEVyqUE6.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
Or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansible That's what came to my mind when I first heard about quantum entanglement just to learn that there's really small chance we could ever use it for communication adam -Original Message- From: Leigh Porter [mailto:leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 2:20 PM To: Vitkovsky, Adam; Aled Morris; Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms -Original Message- From: Vitkovsky, Adam [mailto:avitkov...@emea.att.com] Sent: 23 March 2012 12:57 To: Aled Morris; Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :) adam Nooo, we just need Interocitors! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interocitor --- Leigh __ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com __
Re: Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
On Mar 23, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: Jared Mauch wrote: It is already a monopoly. Most places are served by one of the utilities: power, telephony or cable. He that controls the outside plant controls your fate. The difference is in how the services can be unbundled. Power is additive (if in phase) that network topology is irrelevant. For telephony, unbundling for DSL at L1 is just fine. So is optical fiber if single star topology is used. WDM PON can still be unbundled at L1. However, with time slotted PON, unbundling must be at L2, which is as expensive as L3, which means there effectively is no unbundling. Or, CLEC may rent a raw fiber at L1 and operate its own PON. However, as CLEC has less customer density to share the fiber than ILEC, CLEC's fiber cost per customer is higher than that of ILEC, which is why PON promotes local monopoly. It doesn't promote local monopoly if you don't allow the L1 company to provide L2+ services. If the L1 company is required to be independent of and treat all L2+ services companies equally, then, the ILEC, CLEC, et. all have the same cost per customer. Owen
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On 3/23/12 14:47 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:53:45 +0100, Eugen Leitl said: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/122989-1-5-billion-the-cost-of-cutting-london-toyko-latency-by-60ms Lower latency is good... The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well. Notwithstanding how bad an idea high speed trading from the vantage point of those who don't participate in it, 60ms would place you at a competitive disadvantage to traders that are collocated at or near the exchange, such that if you're engaged in an arbitrage activity between two markets someone can frontrun your front-running.
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On 23/03/2012 15:16, Joel jaeggli wrote: Notwithstanding how bad an idea high speed trading from the vantage point of those who don't participate in it, 60ms would place you at a competitive disadvantage to traders that are collocated at or near the exchange, such that if you're engaged in an arbitrage activity between two markets someone can frontrun your front-running. I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october. Nick
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
Hello, On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:52:21 + Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october. Maybe that's the reason they want to build three with different paths ;) Paul signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: On Mar 23, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: Jared Mauch wrote: It is already a monopoly. Most places are served by one of the utilities: power, telephony or cable. He that controls the outside plant controls your fate. The difference is in how the services can be unbundled. Power is additive (if in phase) that network topology is irrelevant. For telephony, unbundling for DSL at L1 is just fine. So is optical fiber if single star topology is used. WDM PON can still be unbundled at L1. However, with time slotted PON, unbundling must be at L2, which is as expensive as L3, which means there effectively is no unbundling. Or, CLEC may rent a raw fiber at L1 and operate its own PON. However, as CLEC has less customer density to share the fiber than ILEC, CLEC's fiber cost per customer is higher than that of ILEC, which is why PON promotes local monopoly. It doesn't promote local monopoly if you don't allow the L1 company to provide L2+ services. If the L1 company is required to be independent of and treat all L2+ services companies equally, then, the ILEC, CLEC, et. all have the same cost per customer. Hi Owen, Just for grins, I wonder: what is the minimal set of _structural_ requirements that could end the kind of abuses we see from the ILECs without relying on good behavior? The problem with regulatory compulsion is that it restrains the march of technological progress too. Minimum is good. Here's what I'm thinking: 1. Any company which provides more than 5% of the OSI Layer 1 services in a given locality is prohibited from providing any Layer 7 services except those strictly incidental to the operation of the L1 service (e.g. billing or customer service web sites, internal corporate network). 2. Such a communications infrastructure company may vend L1-L6 services only in units suitable for connecting single customers. For example, they're not allowed to lease a multi-customer coaxial cable in the King street neighborhood. The service unit is a dedicated coaxial cable from 44 King street to the head end or A dedicated cable channel from 44 King Street to the head end or 25mbps/25mbps from 44 King strreet to the head end or 25 mbps / 25 mbps from 44 King Street to 888 King Street. 3. Such a communications infrastructure company is compelled to provide reasonable and non-discriminatory access too all who would interconnect. Charge whatever you want but no quantity or special discounts and if you bill any service provider at the head end of the connection then you bill them all the same. No settlement free peering for this guy while that guy pays. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/ Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:21 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:56:46 -, Brandon Butterworth said: I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october. More fun too when we get global warming under control and there's no longer any way to reach it Submarines. It's allegedly been done before, and will probably be done again. No allegedly about it, though it's not officially acknowledged. See Sontag's Blind Man's Bluff. However, that was in shallow water, where the sub could rest on the seabottom next to the cable and divers could exit and work on the cable outside the sub to tap it. The subs involved can't dive to the depths that the cables in question will be mostly laid at, and those exceed reasonable diver operations depths as well. One could fix this situation, but it would probably have to be a (low end) nuclear power plant and a very custom deep submergence hull, and probably on the order of as expensive as the combined cables cost to lay. Probably easier to run redundant cables and fix it come the next spring... -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Vitkovsky, Adam avitkov...@emea.att.com wrote: That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec I bet for $ 1.5 billion neutrino communication (anywhere on Earth) to its antipode in about 40 msec one way) could be developed (i.e., the bit rate improved), and I could see some real market advantages to anyone who had access to it, even at 100 kbps type bit rates. Given that, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some physicists and networking people quietly being hired away by an obscure new venture... Regards Marshall Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :) adam -Original Message- From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 1:31 PM To: Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run: If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km. Aled
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well. The average consumer gets a 15 minute artificial delay in trading, why not implement for all trades... -- Earthquake Magnitude: 4.8 Date: Friday, March 23, 2012 14:35:31 UTC Location: Tonga Latitude: -16.2478; Longitude: -174.0706 Depth: 119.50 km
Weekly Routing Table Report
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG, TRNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group. Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith pfsi...@gmail.com. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 24 Mar, 2012 Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 404075 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 171377 Deaggregation factor: 2.36 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 195407 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 40484 Prefixes per ASN: 9.98 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 32928 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 15486 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:5438 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:143 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.4 Max AS path length visible: 32 Max AS path prepend of ASN (48687) 24 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 454 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 221 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 2330 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:2118 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:5181 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:2 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:893 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2527640720 Equivalent to 150 /8s, 168 /16s and 188 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 68.2 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 68.2 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 92.1 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 172567 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:98560 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 32033 APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.08 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 94960 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:39434 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:4677 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 20.30 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 1235 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:731 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.6 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 18 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:167 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 641283424 Equivalent to 38 /8s, 57 /16s and 53 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 81.3 APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 131072-132095, 132096-133119 APNIC Address Blocks 1/8, 14/8, 27/8, 36/8, 39/8, 42/8, 43/8, 49/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 101/8, 103/8, 106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, 223/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:150469 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:75801 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.99 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 121859 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 49895 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:14936 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 8.16 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot. There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos. On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Marshall Eubanks marshall.euba...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Vitkovsky, Adam avitkov...@emea.att.com wrote: That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec I bet for $ 1.5 billion neutrino communication (anywhere on Earth) to its antipode in about 40 msec one way) could be developed (i.e., the bit rate improved), and I could see some real market advantages to anyone who had access to it, even at 100 kbps type bit rates. Given that, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some physicists and networking people quietly being hired away by an obscure new venture... Regards Marshall Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :) adam -Original Message- From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 1:31 PM To: Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run: If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km. Aled -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
Re: Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
- Original Message - From: Kris Price na...@punk.co.nz I believe Google agrees with me. :-) Are they? Last I saw they were building out a layer 3 network -- no wholesale access -- did this change? No, you're right; that was me being flippant. (He thinks flippant is the name of a dolphin...) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
- Original Message - From: Phil Regnauld regna...@nsrc.org Subject: Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms Vitkovsky, Adam (avitkovsky) writes: Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :) You know the shipping cost on a 2 light year thick lead SFP ? Ah... *here's* the Whacky Weekend thread. I was wondering where it was. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:16:59 -0700, George Herbert said: The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot. There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos. Note that each pulse was probably millions or even billions of neutrinos, so the detection rate was even worse than you'd think. I saw a statistic that every second, 50 trillion neutrinos pass through your body. And the number that will interact is well into the single digits. pgp1dGSYhiBGu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
You guys joke but here is n little article from last week on the current state of Neutrino communications: http://www.economist.com/node/21550242 The neutrinos themselves are created by smashing bunches of protons into a target made of graphite. They are detected roughly 1km away by researchers [..] . By modulating the pulses of protons the group was able to send a message in binary that, when translated, read “neutrino”. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ To stay awake all night adds a day to your life - Stilgar | eMT.
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well. The average consumer gets a 15 minute artificial delay in trading, why not implement for all trades... Virtually any consumer can get true real-time trading data if they're willing to pay some relatively modest fees for that access -- Last I knew, the most expensive 'real-time' fee charged by any exchange was under $200/mo. For everything traded on that exchange. For anybody doing short-term, 'tactical', trading, that is a petty cash expense. Imposing the 15-minute delay on 'everybody', would simply give the 'floor traders' the -exclusive' edge on those trading strategies.
BGP Update Report
BGP Update Report Interval: 15-Mar-12 -to- 22-Mar-12 (7 days) Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072 TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS702981049 4.0% 44.6 -- WINDSTREAM - Windstream Communications Inc 2 - AS840272347 3.6% 34.1 -- CORBINA-AS OJSC Vimpelcom 3 - AS786 72205 3.6% 353.9 -- JANET The JNT Association 4 - AS982942734 2.1% 62.3 -- BSNL-NIB National Internet Backbone 5 - AS24560 32672 1.6% 32.8 -- AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd., Telemedia Services 6 - AS12479 26875 1.3% 131.7 -- UNI2-AS France Telecom Espana SA 7 - AS28683 25791 1.3% 437.1 -- BENINTELECOM 8 - AS32528 22765 1.1%7588.3 -- ABBOTT Abbot Labs 9 - AS580021139 1.1% 72.1 -- DNIC-ASBLK-05800-06055 - DoD Network Information Center 10 - AS606612856 0.6%6428.0 -- VERIZON-BUSINESS-MAE-AS6066 - Verizon Business Network Services Inc. 11 - AS17974 11016 0.6% 8.8 -- TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia 12 - AS26615 10992 0.6% 14.0 -- Tim Celular S.A. 13 - AS755210764 0.5% 9.4 -- VIETEL-AS-AP Vietel Corporation 14 - AS9583 8846 0.4% 11.7 -- SIFY-AS-IN Sify Limited 15 - AS114568074 0.4% 25.6 -- NUVOX - Windstream Nuvox, Inc. 16 - AS369267871 0.4%3935.5 -- CKL1-ASN 17 - AS166377807 0.4% 56.2 -- MTNNS-AS 18 - AS387357705 0.4% 226.6 -- GDS-AS-VN Global Data Service Joint Stock Company 19 - AS132777636 0.4%3818.0 -- HP-MS HP-MS Autonomous System 20 - AS5089 7540 0.4% 47.4 -- NTL Virgin Media Limited TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS (Updates per announced prefix) Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS32528 22765 1.1%7588.3 -- ABBOTT Abbot Labs 2 - AS606612856 0.6%6428.0 -- VERIZON-BUSINESS-MAE-AS6066 - Verizon Business Network Services Inc. 3 - AS369267871 0.4%3935.5 -- CKL1-ASN 4 - AS132777636 0.4%3818.0 -- HP-MS HP-MS Autonomous System 5 - AS266461983 0.1%1983.0 -- TRAVELCLICKCORP1 - TravelCLICK Inc. 6 - AS173701944 0.1%1944.0 -- MCAFEE-COM - McAfee, Inc. 7 - AS299333244 0.2%1622.0 -- OFF-CAMPUS-TELECOMMUNICATIONS - Off Campus Telecommunications 8 - AS8657 1354 0.1%1354.0 -- CPRM CPRM Autonomous System 9 - AS232661085 0.1%1085.0 -- COMCAST-23266 - Comcast Cable Communications 10 - AS55665 981 0.1% 981.0 -- STMI-AS-ID PT Sampoerna Telemedia Indonesia 11 - AS8163 898 0.0% 898.0 -- METROTEL REDES S.A. 12 - AS57767 891 0.0% 891.0 -- RTTC-AS Federal State-owned Enterprise Russian Television and Radio Broadcasting Network 13 - AS16935 845 0.0% 845.0 -- KSC-NETWORKS - Kingland Systems Corp. 14 - AS132243912 0.2% 652.0 -- NAIROBINET 15 - AS44296 0.2% 576.0 -- Maria Irma Salazar 16 - AS37396 613 0.0% 613.0 -- ocean-five 17 - AS2728 2332 0.1% 583.0 -- APARTMENTCOMMUNICATIONPARTNERTSLLC - Apartment Communication Partners, LLC 18 - AS28861 516 0.0% 516.0 -- CARR-FUTURES-LONDON-AS Carr Futures Inc London 19 - AS48632 512 0.0% 512.0 -- BTS-HOLDINGS-PLC BTS Holdings PLC 20 - AS48018 512 0.0% 512.0 -- MTB-COMPUTER-SERVICES-LTD MTB Computer Services Ltd TOP 20 Unstable Prefixes Rank Prefix Upds % Origin AS -- AS Name 1 - 130.36.34.0/2411381 0.5% AS32528 -- ABBOTT Abbot Labs 2 - 130.36.35.0/2411381 0.5% AS32528 -- ABBOTT Abbot Labs 3 - 204.234.0.0/1710973 0.5% AS7029 -- WINDSTREAM - Windstream Communications Inc 4 - 122.161.0.0/16 9991 0.5% AS24560 -- AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd., Telemedia Services 5 - 182.64.0.0/16 8769 0.4% AS24560 -- AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd., Telemedia Services 6 - 62.36.252.0/22 8407 0.4% AS12479 -- UNI2-AS France Telecom Espana SA 7 - 150.225.0.0/16 6430 0.3% AS6066 -- VERIZON-BUSINESS-MAE-AS6066 - Verizon Business Network Services Inc. 8 - 204.29.239.0/246426 0.3% AS6066 -- VERIZON-BUSINESS-MAE-AS6066 - Verizon Business Network Services Inc. 9 - 62.36.249.0/24 6306 0.3% AS12479 -- UNI2-AS France Telecom Espana SA 10 - 62.36.241.0/24 5920 0.3% AS12479 -- UNI2-AS France Telecom Espana SA 11 - 62.36.210.0/24 5651 0.3% AS12479 -- UNI2-AS France Telecom Espana SA 12 - 217.15.120.0/225173 0.2% AS56696 -- ASLIQUID-MPLS Liquid Telecommunications Ltd 13 - 41.223.56.0/24 3936 0.2% AS36926 -- CKL1-ASN 14 - 41.223.57.0/24 3935 0.2% AS36926 -- CKL1-ASN 15 - 194.209.13.0/243818 0.2% AS13277
The Cidr Report
This report has been generated at Fri Mar 23 21:12:33 2012 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date PrefixesCIDR Agg
16-03-12403663 234431
17-03-12404038 234465
18-03-12403961 234676
19-03-12404155 234832
20-03-12404462 235058
21-03-12404718 235841
22-03-12404981 235791
23-03-12405211 237354
AS Summary
40590 Number of ASes in routing system
16973 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
3419 Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS7029 : WINDSTREAM - Windstream Communications Inc
111387168 Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS4134 : CHINANET-BACKBONE No.31,Jin-rong Street
Aggregation Summary
The algorithm used in this report proposes aggregation only
when there is a precise match using the AS path, so as
to preserve traffic transit policies. Aggregation is also
proposed across non-advertised address space ('holes').
--- 23Mar12 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
Table 406982 237361 16962141.7% All ASes
AS6389 3372 201 317194.0% BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK -
BellSouth.net Inc.
AS7029 3419 1853 156645.8% WINDSTREAM - Windstream
Communications Inc
AS4766 2495 1015 148059.3% KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS4323 2978 1499 147949.7% TWTC - tw telecom holdings,
inc.
AS22773 1547 120 142792.2% ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC -
Cox Communications Inc.
AS2118 1427 14 141399.0% RELCOM-AS OOO NPO Relcom
AS18566 2093 705 138866.3% COVAD - Covad Communications
Co.
AS28573 1705 485 122071.6% NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A.
AS4755 1573 415 115873.6% TATACOMM-AS TATA
Communications formerly VSNL
is Leading ISP
AS1785 1889 802 108757.5% AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec
Communications, Inc.
AS10620 1807 815 99254.9% Telmex Colombia S.A.
AS7552 1167 213 95481.7% VIETEL-AS-AP Vietel
Corporation
AS8402 1714 778 93654.6% CORBINA-AS OJSC Vimpelcom
AS7303 1351 440 91167.4% Telecom Argentina S.A.
AS26615 901 29 87296.8% Tim Celular S.A.
AS8151 1494 683 81154.3% Uninet S.A. de C.V.
AS18101 949 164 78582.7% RELIANCE-COMMUNICATIONS-IN
Reliance Communications
Ltd.DAKC MUMBAI
AS4808 1097 345 75268.6% CHINA169-BJ CNCGROUP IP
network China169 Beijing
Province Network
AS9394 887 208 67976.6% CRNET CHINA RAILWAY
Internet(CRNET)
AS17974 1758 1100 65837.4% TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT
Telekomunikasi Indonesia
AS3356 1092 454 63858.4% LEVEL3 Level 3 Communications
AS7545 1660 1026 63438.2% TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Internet
Pty Ltd
AS30036 1402 773 62944.9% MEDIACOM-ENTERPRISE-BUSINESS -
Mediacom Communications Corp
AS17676 686 75 61189.1% GIGAINFRA Softbank BB Corp.
AS19262 996 401 59559.7% VZGNI-TRANSIT - Verizon Online
LLC
AS15557 1034 455 57956.0% LDCOMNET Societe Francaise du
Radiotelephone S.A
AS3549 1000 433 56756.7% GBLX Global Crossing Ltd.
AS22561 985 419 56657.5% DIGITAL-TELEPORT - Digital
Teleport Inc.
AS4804 654 95 55985.5% MPX-AS Microplex PTY LTD
AS22047 584 31 55394.7% VTR BANDA ANCHA S.A.
Total 45716160462967064.9% Top 30 total
Possible Bogus Routes
10.86.64.32/30 AS65530 -Private Use AS-
10.86.64.36/30 AS65530 -Private Use
Re: Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
William Herrin wrote: However, with time slotted PON, unbundling must be at L2, which is as expensive as L3, which means there effectively is no unbundling. I strongly disagree. If this were true, there would be no market for MPLS service: folks would simply buy Internet service and run VPNs. You agree with me. MPLS at L2 sucks because it is as expensive as, but less capable than, IP at L3. If you take my packets off at the first hop and deliver them to a 3rd party provider, If you are saying delivery as IP, your local provider is an ISP with monopoly. Even if the cost for the unbundled L2 circuit was *identical* to the cost of the bundled Internet circuit it would enable a huge range of niche products that aren't practical now. See the reality of your example of MPLS. Masataka Ohta
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
From the abstract: The link achieved a decoded data rate of 0.1 bits/sec with a bit error rate of 1% over a distance of 1.035 km, including 240 m of earth. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.2847v1.pdf For practical communications, at longer distances, you probably lose beam intensity as a 1/R^2 function (the neutrino beam isn't precisely collimated), so 1,000 km away it will be 1 millionth as strong, or 0.001 baud, 1 bit per 115.74 days. At 2,000 km it would be less than 1 bit per year. Sure you want to do this? 8-) On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Simon Lyall si...@darkmere.gen.nz wrote: You guys joke but here is n little article from last week on the current state of Neutrino communications: http://www.economist.com/node/21550242 The neutrinos themselves are created by smashing bunches of protons into a target made of graphite. They are detected roughly 1km away by researchers [..] . By modulating the pulses of protons the group was able to send a message in binary that, when translated, read “neutrino”. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ To stay awake all night adds a day to your life - Stilgar | eMT. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 23/03/2012 15:16, Joel jaeggli wrote: Notwithstanding how bad an idea high speed trading from the vantage point of those who don't participate in it, 60ms would place you at a competitive disadvantage to traders that are collocated at or near the exchange, such that if you're engaged in an arbitrage activity between two markets someone can frontrun your front-running. I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october. hopefully it's harder to drag an anchor then ... so it won't happen? :)
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
Randy Bush wrote: what a silly question. lining the telcos' pockets. american so called 'broadband' is a joke and a scam. randy Really. This is from the Governor's Hawaii Broadband Initiative speedtest website: The indication of above average or below average is based on a comparison of the actual test result to the current NTIA definition of broadband which is 768 kbps download and 200 kbps upload. Any test result above the NTIA definition is considered above average, and any result below is considered below average.
RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km. Aled I suggested this once when it was decided that the latency from California to the UK was too high and that I should reduce it. The company wouldn't go for it, though. G
RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october. Nick Well, you won't have to worry about people dragging anchor across the cable. Other than earthquake or volcanic eruption, I can't imagine what would damage a cable that time of year in that location. It would be interesting if they put some sensors on those cables to monitor ocean salinity and temperature at those depths, too.
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 02:18:26PM -1000, Michael Painter wrote: Really. This is from the Governor's Hawaii Broadband Initiative speedtest website: The indication of above average or below average is based on a comparison of the actual test result to the current NTIA definition of broadband which is 768 kbps download and 200 kbps upload. Any test result above the NTIA definition is considered above average, and any result below is considered below average. Just one more nail in the coffin of the word average. - Matt -- I seem to have my life in reverse. When I was a wee'un, it seemed perfectly normal that one could pick up the phone and speak to anybody else in the world who also has a phone. Now I'm older and more experienced, I'm amazed that this could possibly work. -- Peter Corlett, in the Monastery
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc
On 03/23/2012 02:18 PM, Michael Painter wrote: Randy Bush wrote: what a silly question. lining the telcos' pockets. american so called 'broadband' is a joke and a scam. randy Really. This is from the Governor's Hawaii Broadband Initiative speedtest website: The indication of above average or below average is based on a comparison of the actual test result to the current NTIA definition of broadband which is 768 kbps download and 200 kbps upload. Any test result above the NTIA definition is considered above average, and any result below is considered below average. To be fair to the initiative at least its goal is for universal access to 1Gbps by 2018, something they term 'ultra-high-speed' (not sure where that definition comes from): http://hawaii.gov/gov/broadband-policy-outline/ Paul
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:14 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:16:59 -0700, George Herbert said: The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot. There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos. Note that each pulse was probably millions or even billions of neutrinos, so the detection rate was even worse than you'd think. I saw a statistic that every second, 50 trillion neutrinos pass through your body. And the number that will interact is well into the single digits. Small detection numbers are not, per se, fatal to communication. What fraction of the photons generated by a GPS satellite are captured by your phone? The neutrino interaction rate increases with neutrino energy, and sea water makes a good neutrino detector. You could, for a billion dollars, do a LOT better than they did. By the way, here is the original paper : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.2847v1.pdf Regards Marshall
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc
On Mar 23, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Paul Graydon wrote: On 03/23/2012 02:18 PM, Michael Painter wrote: Randy Bush wrote: what a silly question. lining the telcos' pockets. american so called 'broadband' is a joke and a scam. randy Really. This is from the Governor's Hawaii Broadband Initiative speedtest website: The indication of above average or below average is based on a comparison of the actual test result to the current NTIA definition of broadband which is 768 kbps download and 200 kbps upload. Any test result above the NTIA definition is considered above average, and any result below is considered below average. To be fair to the initiative at least its goal is for universal access to 1Gbps by 2018, something they term 'ultra-high-speed' (not sure where that definition comes from): http://hawaii.gov/gov/broadband-policy-outline/ Paul Yep... That's I think the problem... Back when the initiative documents were written, 1Gbps was ulra-high-speed and 768/200k was average broadband. There is no provision for the terms to shift over time, so, the document gets more and more out of date as time goes by. I suspect that by 2018, 1Gbps will probably be above average, but, not by as much as the document probably thinks. Owen
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 14:18:26 -1000, Michael Painter said: The indication of above average or below average is based on a comparison of the actual test result to the current NTIA definition of broadband which is 768 kbps download and 200 kbps upload. Any test result above the NTIA definition is considered above average, and any result below is considered below average. That's the national definition of broadband that we're stuck with. To show how totally cooked the books are, consider that when they compute percent of people with access to residential broadband, they do it on a per-county basis - and if even *one* subscriber in one corner of the county has broadband, the entire county counts. pgpYJFvKcg2Ep.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc
2012/3/22 Masataka Ohta mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp: William Herrin wrote: The entire optics is shared by all the subscribers sharing a fiber. Thus, the problem is collision avoidance of simultaneous transmission, which makes PON time shared with L2 protocols. Hm... i'm thinking one transceiver might malfunction and get stuck/frozen in the transmitting pulse state, thus making collision avoidance impossible, kind of like a shorted NIC on a shared bus topology LAN, if just one subscriber's equipment happens to have the right kind of failure, and that's neglecting the possibility of intentional attack. Passive optically-shared fiber networks don't sound so hot in that case. So, you share fiber by having one guy control one wavelength (color, e.g. red) and another guy control another wavelength (e.g. blue). That's not a usual PON but WDN PON. -- -JH
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
This article from arstechnica is right on topic. Its about how the city of Amsterdam built an open-access fibre network. It seems to me this is the right way to do it, or at least very close to the right way.. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/03/how-amsterdam-was-wired-for-open-access-fiber.ars -Marcel On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:35 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 14:18:26 -1000, Michael Painter said: The indication of above average or below average is based on a comparison of the actual test result to the current NTIA definition of broadband which is 768 kbps download and 200 kbps upload. Any test result above the NTIA definition is considered above average, and any result below is considered below average. That's the national definition of broadband that we're stuck with. To show how totally cooked the books are, consider that when they compute percent of people with access to residential broadband, they do it on a per-county basis - and if even *one* subscriber in one corner of the county has broadband, the entire county counts.
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Marshall Eubanks marshall.euba...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:14 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:16:59 -0700, George Herbert said: The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot. There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos. Note that each pulse was probably millions or even billions of neutrinos, so the detection rate was even worse than you'd think. I saw a statistic that every second, 50 trillion neutrinos pass through your body. And the number that will interact is well into the single digits. Small detection numbers are not, per se, fatal to communication. What fraction of the photons generated by a GPS satellite are captured by your phone? Much higher fraction than with neutrinos. Remember their MFPs are measured in light-years... The neutrino interaction rate increases with neutrino energy, and sea water makes a good neutrino detector. You could, for a billion dollars, do a LOT better than they did. On the detector end, sure. On the transmitter end, it's just not a well collimated beam due to physics, and no matter how hard you try the generation of neutrinos is a low-efficiency process. By the way, here is the original paper : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.2847v1.pdf Yep. I meant to include the URL but forgot. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc
Paul Graydon wrote: To be fair to the initiative at least its goal is for universal access to 1Gbps by 2018, something they term 'ultra-high-speed' (not sure where that definition comes from): http://hawaii.gov/gov/broadband-policy-outline/ Paul A lofty goal to be sure, the biggest challenge of which may be to get those bits to/from where folks want them to go. RRDWDM? (Really, really, DWDM)
Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 00:08:11 -0400, Marcel Plug said: This article from arstechnica is right on topic. Its about how the city of Amsterdam built an open-access fibre network. It seems to me this is the right way to do it, or at least very close to the right way.. Cue somebody denouncing projects like this done for the common good as socialism in 5.. 4.. 3.. :) pgpEIK62jcmiP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On 3/23/12 19:45 , Jeroen van Aart wrote: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well. The average consumer gets a 15 minute artificial delay in trading, why in data, not trading... and that really only applies to the sort of free feeds you're getting. Even the average consumer gets their ecn cleared market order filled in seconds inclusive of order entry. not implement for all trades...
