[148032] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ray Soucy)
Fri Dec 30 07:25:47 2011
In-Reply-To: <CACg3zYFZB4eJA31sx2+gjVEGfzd+YoJzYn=89Or_bHFPEkNMrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 07:24:51 -0500
From: Ray Soucy <rps@maine.edu>
To: Tei <oscar.vives@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
What we really need is a new method of sending data. The fact that I
will never be able to send something from Maine to California in less
than 15 ms is not acceptable.
The speed of light is such a drag.
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Tei <oscar.vives@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am php/javascript programmer.
>
> The web used to be request/reply. With the request small (but not
> small enough), and the reply long.
> But the time for permanent connections is comming. =C2=A0Links from clien=
ts
> to server that are permanent. =C2=A0Or look like that in the application
> layer.
>
> On one sense, this is a optimization, no more pooling the server "do
> you have something for me?" every n seconds. =C2=A0But I imagine mostly
> make things like caching and proxies pointless.
>
> At some point, users will start getting unhappy with web pages replies
> slower than 100 ms. =C2=A0 ATM my webpages takes longer to start Jquery
> that all the server-client interactions. Most obvious optimization is
> never reload the page, and run everything trough ajax calls.
>
> I am not dumb, =C2=A0I know turning webpages into applications make
> webpages to fragile. But I am scared of javascripts. Javascript is
> just too dawmn usefull now, browsers too broken (mostly IE), and
> Javascript is like a superhero that fix all. =C2=A0 The web is going to
> change in a few years, from a "request" "reply" interchange network,
> to something more like a computer "bus". =C2=A0 =C2=A0I don't know how th=
e
> "wires" will react to this.
>
>
>
> On 30 December 2011 10:58, Vitkovsky, Adam <avitkovsky@emea.att.com> wrot=
e:
>> Actually an a Cisco presentation on Nexus 7k I asked whether it's possib=
le to transport the FCoE over let's say EoMPLS or VPLS and did not get a st=
raight answer though that was half a year ago
>> -but it would be really cool to connect hard-drives directly over contin=
ents
>>
>>
>> adam
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tom Hill [mailto:tom@ninjabadger.net]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 8:58 PM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet!
>>
>> On Thu, 2011-12-29 at 10:06 -0500, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>> yes, let's get something with say fixed sized packets, ability to have
>>> predictable jitter and also, for fun, no more STP!
>>> Ethernet is too complex, maybe something simpler? I hear there's this
>>> new tech 'ATM'? it seems to fit the bill!
>>
>> Pfft. Everyone knows that Fibre Channel's going to replace everything...
>> The minute we get those 128Gbit/sec transmission characteristics,
>> Ethernet's gonna be as good as RS-485.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> =E2=84=B1in del =E2=84=B3ensaje.
>
--=20
Ray Soucy
Epic Communications Specialist
Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526
Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System
http://www.networkmaine.net/
