[OT] 40 Gbps internet connection

[Zeninja]

http://www.thelocal.se/7869/20070712/

[Dribble Joy]

Sex, though what's the latency and upload speed like?

[MrWeedster]

think latency is under 10ms and uplink is the same as downlink.

but first get the serverfarm that pushes 40gb/s thru the line ^^

anyway: heard of some expirment from cisco to bring (dunno ~2012 maybe) 40gb/s internet to every fibre-connected house.



greetz

[rob444]

And she lives only 20 kilometers from me :(.

[Zeninja]

And she lives only 20 kilometers from me :(.
Lucky you... such a hot 75 years old female at close range ;)

[CMaster]

Lucky you... such a hot 75 years old female at close range ;)

Is it worth it for the world's fastest net connection do you think?

[ashley watts]

Is it worth it for the world's fastest net connection do you think?

Yes.

Bag ftw

[Apocalypsox]

Ill take a linkup please -.- Maybe i wouldnt get 200 ping in NC anymore :lol:

[Lexxuk]

I dunno, could a typical hard drive cope with 40gb/sec? Mines a SATA2 so a theoretical max of 300mb/sec though really caps at 60meg, so if I had a 40gig line my hard drive would be a bottleneck, I guess OC3 would be the top end for the typical home users connection and drive.

[rob444]

Nah our harddrives wont be able to write in that kind of speed. Network technology has come much further in speed than the harddrives have :(. Come on harddrive manufacturers, work harder!

Oh, I guess it's possible to save files temporarily in the RAM though. Not sure how fast RAM is atm but pretty damn fast.

[Asurmen Spec Op]

I was 2miles from getting a 30mbs up/down connection :'(


Asurmen is sad

[MrWeedster]

Doesnt matter if HDs could handle the speed or not.
But it would be a great advancement if netspeed would outperform our computers. Filesharing would be brought to an insane lvl :>
Not to think about crashing backbones all around the world. There is 100Gb Ethernet in development which cant handle xxxx clients on a backbone if they would use the lines to the excess. I think a broad availibility of 40gb lines would rly bring the net down on the knees - But, as mentioned before - no actual HD would bring the performance.

No need for a hoster anymore - Every1 could host a complete serverfarm with such a line ^^

Think of onlinegames - what do u think would be possible with 40gb/s? That would be 5(!!!!) GIGABYTE throughput per SECOND!!!! Can u imagine what would be possible? Its just crasy, insane, awesome, whatever.

I want that line - need to backup the internet :>



greetz

[zii]

This article is incorrect. She does not have the worlds fastest residential internet connection.

Consumer broadband ISP in Singapore provision 100Mbits for £40 a month. The cable modem is SG$535, about £176.

Advert/URL :

Starhub 100Mbits (http://www.starhub.com/portal/site/Online/menuitem.f2b59af84f3db376da055b608324a5a0/?vgnextoid=4ce653a58baeb010VgnVCM10000038425a0aRCRD)

[MrWeedster]

did u read correctly?

it says 40 gb/s (GIGAbit) not 40 Mbit/s.


greetz

[zii]

I misread. wow. 40gbits! oh. Ignore me.

[Zheo]

I want one...

[Flame Bait]

VDSL has a limit of 50/10Mbps and this will be what comes next. It will not eliminate latency even the least bit because that's a measurement of the speed which light travels.

Fiber is lit by Infrared diodes which create channelized beams of light (infrared light waves) and data is carried by the light signals which form bands known as bandwidth or wavelengths. So your data can only travel as fast as the speed which the light signals travel and the only way to cut down latency is to shorten the paths.

Interesting facts about the VDSL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VDSL

Some info relating to infrared light waves
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/physical_science/magnetism/em_visible_light.html

Very good explanation of latency
http://t1rex.blogspot.com/2005/03/when-speed-of-light-is-too-slow.html

[CMaster]

VDSL has a limit of 50/10Mbps and this will be what comes next. It will not eliminate latency even the least bit because that's a measurement of the speed which light travels.

Fiber is lit by Infrared diodes which create channelized beams of light (infrared light waves) and data is carried by the light signals which form bands known as bandwidth or wavelengths. So your data can only travel as fast as the speed which the light signals travel and the only way to cut down latency is to shorten the paths.

Interesting facts about the VDSL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VDSL

Some info relating to infrared light waves
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/physical_science/magnetism/em_visible_light.html

Very good explanation of latency
http://t1rex.blogspot.com/2005/03/when-speed-of-light-is-too-slow.html

Most of us are currently on twisted-pair or other electrical connections, and the signals in cable travel a hell of a lot slower than light. That said, the big distances are crossed by big backbones, so if they are fibre we'll never see a noticable improvement. Routers and such can sill be speed up mind.

[Flame Bait]

Most of us are currently on twisted-pair or other electrical connections, and the signals in cable travel a hell of a lot slower than light. That said, the big distances are crossed by big backbones, so if they are fibre we'll never see a noticable improvement. Routers and such can sill be speed up mind.

Well xDSL is actually fully digital and therefore no conversions need to be done at the switch even if your home uses copper. The signal from your PC usually travels less then 5 miles and no greater then 25 miles. Its possible to go beyond that distance but then you need signal amplification to prevent the speed from decreasing. So really the latency between home to switch is probably under 2-8ms. You can type "tracert yourisp.com" in dos and the second hop would be the actual latency to the ILEC. The real problem we face in this day and age with latency is bad peering and routing schemes used to send data to the transcontinental backbones. Again the shortest path will always be faster but at times crappy networks send your data travel much greater distances then needed rather then adding more peers.

[Setlec]

damn i wish to have those very high broadband... mine just a damn 1 Mbps downstream... :mad: the day i see this happening in Brazil i'll be 100 years old or 6 feet under.... hahahaha


cheers

[rob444]

Even if it would have been 40mbit, we still provide users with 1gbit internet in southern part of sweden which is kinda nice...

[Lexxuk]

Currently in the works is people who are trying to take the flash type memory (SD cards etc..) onto the HDD level. The problem with hard drives is that it needs to read/write to different sectors which requires physical movment inside the drum. With flash type there is no movement so the 1st byte is as fast as the last. Obviously it wont be flash because that'd be useless for long term storage, but its like an SD card only bigger, and faster.

With that kinda technology hard drive latency goes down and so does read/write anywhere on the disk. Still the problem with too fast a connection would be the current problem with ADSL, if you cap your download speeds you cant upload, cap your upload speeds and you cant download. With hard drives you would cap its possible write speeds so it cant be read from faster than a crawl.

Maybe with a set of super fast drives in RAID used only for downloads whilst your OS and stuff uses a different drive, but would you then cap the limits of the drive controllers slowing the system down even more?

Personally I'd be happy with an internet connection that lets me watch HD quality porn on my mobile, give me something to play with on the train ;)

[Asurmen Spec Op]

Ge Lexxuk, you and your porn :o

[Mighty Max]

The speed of storage is definately a problem:

The top level of RAM is currently DDR3-1600, which for one channel only delivers 100GBit/s (800MHz * 2 [DDR factor] * 64bit bandwidth) in read and theorectical! Include Waitstates for non-linear access and writes and you will fast feel a bottleneck here.
At least two channels are recommented to keep up with the pace.

Therefore: Don't fall for the illusion that any non volatile, non distributed storage device will handle this amount of transfer anytime soon.

Given the 18Months-rule, we still got several years to get there.

[Apocalypsox]

Ge Lexxuk, you and your porn :o

Your one to be talkin :lol:

Imo, id be happy if they got 1gbps wireless internet (Which they dont atlesat in my local area) That way i wouldnt have to have this clusterfuck of wires strewn about my house. I could just set a router in the center of me house in the basement, and link up all my shit onto that. (All my shit being a 360, 4 computers and a few TV systems.)

[Lexxuk]

Ge Lexxuk, you and your porn :o

*coff*channel912*coff* porn? what porn? :angel:

[nobby]

I had 400MB at least... in japan

That was fast as fuck...

I don't think Britain will see the light of day in even looking at 1Gbps in the next 10 years...

[Zeninja]

I don't think Britain will see the light of day in even looking at 1Gbps in the next 10 years...
That's right, cause they'll be too busy trying to find food and dealing with climatic/political upheavals...

Hehehe :wtf:

[Lexxuk]

I had 400MB at least... in japan

That was fast as fuck...

I don't think Britain will see the light of day in even looking at 1Gbps in the next 10 years...

You'll get ADSL2 on the 21CN for upto 24MB (by 2009/10), from that BT (which owns most of the backbone) will try to provide bandwith. Its no good having a 400mb/sec connection when BT charge your ISP for every gig you download. Future in the UK is quality of service, services over the internet (VOIP, VOD etc..) which require bandwith so that is the direction BT will take over time.

[Asurmen Spec Op]

*coff*channel912*coff* porn? what porn? :angel:
I spent like 5min watching your sig, I hate you :'(