> At the risk of sounding like a politician I will actually state that the
> physical/private interest topology of the fiber network in the United States
> is incredibly prohibitive of the advances that you guys are talking about.
> The big picture here is table scraps to equipment manufacturers no
Now just imagine that people inside the big firewall could tell you how they
engineered multi-gig FTTTVs.
At the risk of sounding like a politician I will actually state that the
physical/private interest topology of the fiber network in the United States
is incredibly prohibitive of the advances
DNStop is a real good tool for what it does. It's an exceptionally useful tool
and probably at the top of my list for deciphering DoS attacks targetting or
amplifying against DNS resolvers. But for RTT and timeouts, errr not so good.
Sorry for the top post. Stupid Blackberry...
Regards,
Stef
Joseph Jackson wrote on 01/12/09 01:06:
Anyone know of a tool that can take a pcap file from wireshark that was used to
collect dns queries and then spit out statistics about the queries such as RTT
and timeouts?
You also have DNSTop
http://dns.measurement-factory.com/tools/dnstop/
Best reg
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Joseph Jackson wrote:
>>
>> Anyone know of a tool that can take a pcap file from wireshark that was
>> used to collect dns queries and then spit out statistics about the
>> queries such as RTT and timeouts?
>
> I don't know i
> actually, the killer here is PMTU... there is almost no way to
> effectively utilize the BW when the MTU is locked to 1500 bytes.
and the reality, e.g. ntt b-flets, is often pppoe v4-only, which is
lower.
randy
On Dec 1, 2009, at 2:33 PM, Paul Wall wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Dan White wrote:
>> All valid points. Deploying a strand to each customer from the CO/Cabinet
>> is a good way to future proof your plant.
>
> I would argue that every customer is entitled to duplex fiber.
I'll set
On 01/12/09 20:06, Byron Hicks wrote:
> These were the numbers presented at an Internet2 meeting about the 4k
> testing happening between UCSD and UW. I'm not sure what compression
> algorithm they were using for the test.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/09/super_hi_vision.html
"The
> You could deploy 2 or 3 strands and get more bandwidth to the customer,
> using perhaps less expensive hardware, or you could maintain fewer
strands
> in the ground and depend on equipment manufactures to maintain an
adequate
> growth in bandwidth capabilities.
>
> Neither approach is going to wo
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 08:07:42PM +, James Bensley wrote:
> I'm wondering why despite all this comparatively magical speed
> increase we have seen over the last decade, with 10 times better on
> the horizon, we the customer ever get a 1:1 speed ratio?
speed kills...
actually,
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 02:33:20PM -0500, Paul Wall wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Dan White wrote:
> > All valid points. Deploying a strand to each customer from the CO/Cabinet
> > is a good way to future proof your plant.
>
> I would argue that every customer is entitled to duplex fi
On 01/12/09 14:33 -0500, Paul Wall wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Dan White wrote:
All valid points. Deploying a strand to each customer from the CO/Cabinet
is a good way to future proof your plant.
I would argue that every customer is entitled to duplex fiber.
In the case of PON,
I'm wondering why despite all this comparatively magical speed
increase we have seen over the last decade, with 10 times better on
the horizon, we the customer ever get a 1:1 speed ratio?
--
Regards,
James ;)
Charles de Gaulle - "The better I get to know men, the more I find
myself loving dogs.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Dan White wrote:
> All valid points. Deploying a strand to each customer from the CO/Cabinet
> is a good way to future proof your plant.
I would argue that every customer is entitled to duplex fiber.
Drive Slow,
Paul Wall
Dan White wrote:
All valid points. Deploying a strand to each customer from the CO/Cabinet
is a good way to future proof your plant.
However, there are some advantages to GPON - particularly if you're
deploying high bandwidth video services. PON ONTs share 2.4Gb/s of
bandwidth downstream, which
> If, 10 years ago (1999) when most internet-connected homes still used
> dialup, you had suggested that ISPs would be putting in gigabit
> services
> to homes, people would have laughed. Yet today, here we are talking
> about gig feeds. I wonder how much bandwidth homes will be using 10
> years
These were the numbers presented at an Internet2 meeting about the 4k
testing happening between UCSD and UW. I'm not sure what compression
algorithm they were using for the test.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Byron Hicks said:
>> 4k video feeds (the ne
> I wonder how much bandwidth homes will be using 10 years from now...
100% of it (if you let us).
Cheers,
Michael Holstein
Cleveland State University
Once upon a time, Byron Hicks said:
> 4k video feeds (the new High Def):
>
> compressed: 1Gb/s
??
Current over-the-air HD (at a max of 1080i) is up to 19 megabits per
second (and most don't run it that high). Most cable systems compress
it more. 4k video is roughly 8 times the pixels than 108
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, JC Dill wrote:
If, 10 years ago (1999) when most internet-connected homes still used
dialup, you had suggested that ISPs would be putting in gigabit services
to homes, people would have laughed. Yet today, here we are talking
about gig feeds. I wonder how much bandwidth ho
4k video feeds (the new High Def):
compressed: 1Gb/s
uncompressed: 9Gb/s
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:39 PM, JC Dill wrote:
> Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>>
>> You don't need to supply more than a gig per household,
>
> "640K ought to be enough for anybody. " (oft mis-attributed to Bill Gates)
> ht
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
You don't need to supply more than a gig per household,
"640K ought to be enough for anybody. " (oft mis-attributed to Bill
Gates) http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates
If, 10 years ago (1999) when most internet-connected homes still used
dialup, you had sugg
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, Dan White wrote:
However, there are some advantages to GPON - particularly if you're
deploying high bandwidth video services. PON ONTs share 2.4Gb/s of
bandwidth downstream, which means you can support more than a gig of video
on each PON, if deploying in dense mode.
You do
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Justin Shore wrote:
> Luke Marrott wrote:
>> I'm wondering what everyones thoughts are in regards to FTTH using Active
>> Ethernet or Passive. I work for a FTTH Provider that has done Active
>> Ethernet on a few networks so I'm always biased in discussions, but I
>
On 01/12/09 10:43 -0600, Justin Shore wrote:
Active is the way to go. Passive is merely a stepping stone on the way
to active. Passive only makes sense (in some cases) if you are 1) fiber
poor and 2) not doing a greenfield deployment. If you have the fiber to
work with or if you are build
Luke Marrott wrote:
I'm wondering what everyones thoughts are in regards to FTTH using Active
Ethernet or Passive. I work for a FTTH Provider that has done Active
Ethernet on a few networks so I'm always biased in discussions, but I don't
know anyone with experience in PON.
Active is the way to
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Joseph Jackson wrote:
>
> Anyone know of a tool that can take a pcap file from wireshark that was
> used to collect dns queries and then spit out statistics about the
> queries such as RTT and timeouts?
I don't know if it'll do exactly what you want, but have a look at
https:/
Joseph Jackson (jjackson) writes:
> Hey List!
>
> Anyone know of a tool that can take a pcap file from wireshark that was used
> to collect dns queries and then spit out statistics about the queries such as
> RTT and timeouts?
I don't know if DSC does this, but check it out:
ht
28 matches
Mail list logo
