First off, it seems unlikely as the phone will either be a corporate device, including BYOD, or a personal device. In the first case the traffic will have to flow across the network (including the firewall)
What stops a BYOD from using multipath? It will have to use the 4G connection when it isn't on the corporate wifi, so what keeps it from using both?
Your IDS/IPS cannot look inside SSL traffic
Sure it can. You just push a new root certificate to your devices and intercept away.
USB device drivers are not of sufficient quality to make that mitigation very viable. Just exploit the broken drivers instead; on most operating systems device drivers have the equivalent of root privileges.
Personally I am much more excited about a gigatesla than a Tesla Giga.
Wrong way around surely: The test audience found the movie confusing and sad and so the internal monologue and the happy ending was added. Later came the director's cut which attempted (unsuccessfully) to outdo 2001: A Space Odyssey for longest CGI scene with nothing happening.
The reason why routers are so underpowered is that nobody uses multicast. If there was a strong demand for multicast I'm sure that the manufacturers would increase the capacity of their hardware.
If you build it and it costs less than 6 figures USD, you will drown in customers. It would not be used primarily for multicast at first, it would be used to get BGP working better, but every major ISP would want your router.
Using P2P does not lower the total load on the network, it just spreads it out more evenly.
Correctly done P2P sends traffic through the best route, typically from someone on the same ISP as the recipient and preferably from the same neighbourhood. That lowers total load a lot. Most current P2P networks do not particularly worry about optimal routing; they are much more constrained by traffic shaping or (often artificially) limited last-mile upstream capacity. It would be fairly easy to give priority to low-latency peers.
Besides, P2P can solve the problem of subscribers not watching at exactly the same time. Multicast breaks as soon as someone presses pause.
Multicast is not a viable technology for truly large scale deployments (more than a few hundred thousand hosts perhaps). Routers and switches do not have the required resources to maintain multicast routing/switching tables for millions of multicast sessions.
The correct way to solve the problem is to push it to the end nodes. They have much more CPU power and memory than routers and switches. The technology to do so has existed for a long time: P2P.
Thats how the internet is paid for. The sending provider pays the receiving provider for the bandwidth, and this is the only rational way it can be.
No. That is not how it works. The truth is that the smaller provider pays the larger provider, no matter which direction the traffic flows. Some companies, like Netflix, are nice enough to not use their size as an excuse to charge people -- they offer free peering at internet exchanges. Other companies are maximally greedy.
Netflix limited the highest bandwidth streams to direct peers for a while. Everyone going through transit could not get the highest quality.
Similarly, it would be quite trivial for Netflix to limit non-paying ISPs to lower quality.
We are talking about ODF here. The encoding will be UTF-8.
ASCII is a subset of UTF-8-encoded Unicode. If you do not use anything beyond ASCII in your document, the unzipped file will only contain ASCII. If you put Korean characters into your document (and you do not have to change font to do so, if you are using a decent font), the unzipped file will contain non-ASCII characters. In both cases, the file will be a valid UTF-8-encoded Unicode XML document.
www.hp.com is fully moonshot-powered
That would explain why the HP site is so ridiculously slow. Except that it has been slow for years, but maybe they were always running it on prototypes.
One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis
