I'm one of the reporters who covers broadband and cloud computing for
InformationWeek magazine (www.informationweek.com), and it's
interesting to me that one of the issues with cloud adoption has to do
with the limited pipe networks available in this country. For example,
it's not feasible
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Jonathan Feldman wrote:
> I'm one of the reporters who covers broadband and cloud computing for
> InformationWeek magazine (www.informationweek.com), and it's interesting to
> me that one of the issues with cloud adoption has to do with the limited
> pipe networks
On 27/06/2010 14:03, Jonathan Feldman wrote:
> For example, it's not feasible to do a massive data load through the
> networks that are currently available -- you need to FedEx a hard drive
> to Amazon. Holy cow, it's SneakerNet for the 21st Century!
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station
More than one person has pointed out that offline media will always be
higher bandwidth than transmission lines (but nobody with such
elegance and hilarity as Nick Hilliard's last post). Point taken.
The question, in my mind, is whether it's reasonable to ask that
regional providers reach
... as Andrew T teaches ... :D
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 27/06/2010 14:03, Jonathan Feldman wrote:
> > For example, it's not feasible to do a massive data load through the
> > networks that are currently available -- you need to FedEx a hard drive
> > to Amazon.
> The question, in my mind, is whether it's reasonable to ask that
> regional providers reach the same bar as privately owned campus
> networks.
you are comparing LAN to WAN, never a bright idea
randy
I've never claimed to be particularly bright, but I do like to
challenge assumptions.
I meant "privately owned campuses spanning many miles." Is that a
WAN? LAN? "MAN"? Seriously, should there really be a difference?
If so, why must there be a difference? Let's not forget that ADSL is
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Feldman
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 4:14 PM
> To: Randy Bush
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Broadband initiatives - impact to your network?
>
> I've never claimed to be particularly bright, but I do like to
> That is when conversations bearing sounds like mpscp and uftp begin and
> then someone says "aw, screw it, just send them a disk".
LOL
> Subject: RE: Broadband initiatives - impact to your network?
> Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:46:37 -0700
> From:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Jonathan Feldman wrote:
> I don't agree with you, Christopher, that the broadband plan won't affect
> corporate users. I know that this list _mostly_ consists of operators, but
(there are a fair number of consumer network operations folks on nanog
as well...)
T
is geoff's isp business 101 still the canonic reference for what this
reporter needs for clue? doing it micro-incrementally on list is a
major ton of .
randy
I wrote a first round BTOP application.
No, the program doesn't quite promise to change, by orders of
magnitude, the pipe that's available to most folks, and even if it
did, that isn't a very strong promise.
"Most folks" live in urban areas, adequately served by physics, if not
the private,
On Jun 28, 2010, at 7:42 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> Is unidirectional transport (monitized video streams) the rural service most
> absent and most valued, or are other characteristics of networks competitive
> with, or superior to, that service model?
If you drive around rural central
> Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:46:37 -0700
> From: "George Bonser"
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jonathan Feldman
> > Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 4:14 PM
> > To: Randy Bush
> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> > Subject: Re: Broadband in
Jonathan Feldman wrote:
I'm one of the reporters who covers broadband and cloud computing for
InformationWeek magazine (www.informationweek.com), and it's
interesting to me that one of the issues with cloud adoption has to do
with the limited pipe networks available in this country. For example
If the data you need to preload is sufficiently large (e.g. 10s or
hundreds of terabytes then yeah it should come as no surprise that it
might be more convenient to move by shifting around disks. 100TB of raw
disk is around $8000.
On 2010-06-28 21:50, JC Dill wrote:
Jonathan Feldman wrote:
On Jun 29, 2010, at 12:59 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
If the data you need to preload is sufficiently large (e.g. 10s or
hundreds of terabytes then yeah it should come as no surprise that
it might be more convenient to move by shifting around disks. 100TB
of raw disk is around $8000.
The
On Monday, June 28, 2010 06:50:10 pm Randy Bush wrote:
> > The question, in my mind, is whether it's reasonable to ask that
> > regional providers reach the same bar as privately owned campus
> > networks.
>
> you are comparing LAN to WAN, never a bright idea
Even ATM years ago blurred that arbit
On Monday, June 28, 2010 08:42:49 pm Randy Bush wrote:
> is geoff's isp business 101 still the canonic reference for what this
> reporter needs for clue?
The reporter in question has plenty of clue.
> > The question, in my mind, is whether it's reasonable to ask that
> > regional providers reach the same bar as privately owned campus
> > networks.
>
> you are comparing LAN to WAN, never a bright idea
Today's residential internet speeds ("WAN") are greater than the LAN
speeds of 20 years ago.
On Monday, June 28, 2010 05:46:00 pm Christopher Morrow wrote:
> The broadband plan stuff mostly covers consumers, not enterprises,
> most of the (amazon as the example here) cloud folks offer
> disk-delivery options for businesses.
One successful BTOP application in North Carolina has more to do
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Monday, June 28, 2010 05:46:00 pm Christopher Morrow wrote:
The broadband plan stuff mostly covers consumers, not enterprises,
most of the (amazon as the example here) cloud folks offer
disk-delivery options for businesses.
One successful BTOP applica
On 6/29/2010 09:17, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Monday, June 28, 2010 06:50:10 pm Randy Bush wrote:
>> you are comparing LAN to WAN, never a bright idea
>
> Even ATM years ago blurred that arbitrary line.
>
> Why does there even need to be a line between local and wide in terms of
> networking?
As
> > you are comparing LAN to WAN, never a bright idea
>
> Even ATM years ago blurred that arbitrary line.
>
> Why does there even need to be a line between local and wide in
> terms of networking? As far as IP is concerned, there is no
> difference. Even as far as Ethernet is concerned, there i
24 matches
Mail list logo
