Whatever Happened to Internet II? 176
Julio writes "Whatever happened to the Internet II?
This cpnet story says
'There is a computer science networking instructor at the University of Wisconsin, which is an I-2 institution, that is collaborative teaching a course at a college in Japan on computer networking. The students in Wisconsin were able to hear an expert on networking who just happened to be in Japan and they weren't constrained by being in Wisconsin,'" Apparently 150 colleges are hooked to I-2 already, and it's growing steadily -- and quietly.
Internet II (Score:1)
I'm not sure how much this will be scintillating the average
It's an educational tool, and seems to me to have more in common with a large academic WAN (high bandwidth, no fluff) than with our beloved Internet (creepy-crawly, mix-mash). A lot of the genius of the Internet (mark I) came about because of people being random. It's rather like Hyde Park, except with less people wrapped in flags.
Well, maybe not all that many less.
Anyway, this is more of a 'Whatever happened to...' article than anything. Thanks for the information.
It'd be nice if every institute of higher learning managed to wire to this puppy without tripping over the pitfalls that so shifted (and improved?) our Internet.
Apologies for the choppiness, I write this while I negotiate with one of my suppliers.
-l
fast forward 5 years... (Score:3)
"Microsoft, not content to bloat system requirements for simple tasks, has turned to bloating bandwidth requirements for simple tasks. The new MsFTP protocol requires 4 bytes bandwidth per byte of real data sent. To that end, and in preparation for the commercial acceptance of Internet II running MSTCP/IP, Microsoft has spent billions investing in gigabit PoP technology, to ensure that you will be able to surf to ESPN to check out the score on the game, 10 MB ActiveX control and all."
Am I missing something? (Score:2)
Isn't this just a big private broadband IP-based network? I find it a little hard to understand how this qualifies as 'Internet II' - from what I understand this doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with IPV6.
Just 30 regional hubs?
Secondly, it's routed through more than 30 regional hubs, called gigapops. "So if a school in Gary, Indiana wants to talk to a school in Elk Hart, Indiana it shouldn't have to go through Chicago," explains Peebles.
Nice to know that the Indiana is making it's big push for world domination. ;)
Just seems like a bit of a useless article to me.
I2... (Score:2)
I2 is basically what the internet was back in the 80s and early 90s, before the web took over.
-A.P.
--
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:4)
Seriously though, this technology seems pretty impressive. The current internet was so poorly designed. Its barely even salvageable. We need a new system designed from the ground up to be fast and efficient. Too bad internet2 probably wont be that for home users for many years to come. Even if we all get DSL, our packets will not be routed in a reasonable manner. Traceroute your connection to your favorite websites and you'll see what I mean.. you never know when your packets will reach the next bottleneck.
Internet-0 maybe (Score:1)
Surely this is no more Internet-2 then the UK's JANet (Joint Academic Network) was Internet-1. It's an educational WAN. Is it available fully internationally (Europe wide as well as USA and Singapore)? Does it link businesses as well as educational establishments? Are there plans to allow individual access?
Whether they like it or not, it can't be considered a true INTER-Net until it has individuals on it, with all the problems that creates, until it is open access then it is simply a Private WAN. Big deal. Mobil Corp have WAN Links. So does IBM. Are these Internet-3 and Internet-4. Can we all have our own Internets? Someone will need to establish a naming convention if we can!
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
Re:I2... (Score:2)
(Well, there is that and my boss told me I was )
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
Some more stuff... (Score:5)
Some links:
vbns network map [vbns.net]
Internet 2 connected schools [internet2.edu]
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
Still On A 56K (Score:1)
There is no way in hell that Charter Communications will ever get around to putting in a able modems in my area. It seems that their recent buyout by AT&T has let their plans fall behind schedule!
That's the Internet II, eh? (Score:3)
Yes, I undertstand that it would take something on the order of the US national debt to upgrade the Internet to "Internet II" capabilities, but it seems pretty damned precocious for them to be calling their new toy Internet II when the only thing it shares in similarity to the Internet is that it connects computers. But, of course, it will be highly praised because it serves a loftier purpose and doesn't cater to those pathetic outsiders. To quote the article: I-2 is only currently available to institutions of higher learning, and organizers don't see that changing any time soon. The whole idea is to take down roadblocks from the first Internet, like heavy traffic and slow interfaces, and speed things up for college researchers sharing information. Yeah, I'm still having nightmares about those slow-as-molasses connections that I got while I was attending a community college; took me damn near an hour to pull down a 300 MB iso on that slow beast.
I've got nothing against these colleges using the insane amounts of money that they make to build themselves up the geek equivalent of the good-ole-boy network, but labeling it "Internet II" makes me want to wretch from the oily marketing feel of the whole project. Hey, more power to them; in a few years, they'll start trickling their discarded leftovers to the rest of the world and we might begin to see improvements in the real Internet. *shrug*
Deosyne
Re:Why is the icon for the Internet... (Score:1)
Re:Some more stuff... (Score:1)
Very basic question (Score:1)
The Internet is chunked up according to business boundaries when ideally it should be organised along geographic boundaries. Are there any existing business models for Internet "services" that are also compatible with geography?
Re:Internet II (Score:1)
Ok, maybe not.
---
And you though quake was cool! (Score:1)
Re:That's the Internet II, eh? (Score:2)
What you fail to understand is that that isn't how the Internet was back when it was academia-mostly. But it was still called the Internet then, too, while the rest of the world was subjected to IPX, SNA, OSI and all that.
oily marketing feel
How can something that is not "for sale" have a marketing feel?
Re:Very basic question (Score:1)
I2 is quite because.... (Score:2)
Re:Internet-0 maybe (Score:1)
--
Re:That's the Internet II, eh? (Score:1)
I saw no evidence in the article that they are running anything other than IPv4 over this fat network. Or doing anything "interesting". I'm sure it's a lovely part of the Internet to be on, but that's all.
as i recall... (Score:1)
all of the "Superfast Unobtainable Internet Connections(TM)" are just that; unobtainable.
most of us are still on 56k, and some on 33.6 or worse.
even with cable and dsl well into the public allready, this technology is worthless to us unless we have a super-beowolf cluster doing DNA research as an excuse to get it.
ill be happy when i @home removes that 128kilobit cap on my upstream.
Re:That's the Internet II, eh? (Score:1)
What you fail to understand is that that isn't how the Internet was back when it was academia-mostly. But it was still called the Internet then, too, while the rest of the world was subjected to IPX, SNA, OSI and all that.
Yes, but that is not what the internet is now, everything has moved on, and now Internet is used to refer to the interconnection of computers globally, with few restrictions on who can be part of it. Private versions are sometimes called intranets - why isn't this just an academic intranet? Acanet anyone?
How can something that is not "for sale" have a marketing feel?
Same reason as above - WHY did they call it Internet-2 if it does not, and is not intended to, resemble the CURRENT Internet(-1). If they want to keep it back as an Acadamic-only system, why give it a name that implies different? It doesn't really matter what the Internet originally was (why not call it Arpanet-2? That is also where it's roots lie) - they have chosen a publicity-seeking name, even if that wasn't their attention, although it would be hard to believe that was the case.
check PA Ave. (Score:1)
That's what I love about them high-school girls. I get older, they stay the same age... yes they do.
--Wooderson 1976
Internet 2 for app development as well (Score:2)
One of the goals of Internet 2 that is useful (IMO, anyway) is a test platform for very high-speed applications.
It's all very well developing some very shiny technologies that 'should work' when they have enough WAN bandwidth, but it's another thing entirely to do real-world testing on them.
Things like developing the protocols to send HDTV over the network need a real live network like this (to test human factors in development as much as technical), so it's really not just "to take down roadblocks from the first Internet, like heavy traffic and slow interfaces, and speed things up for college researchers sharing information".
The FibreSphere (Score:5)
It is rather interesting that the base human desires seem to dominate new technology. I've heard an urban ledgend that the vibrator was the third patented invention that used the new minature electric motors (after sewing machine and something else I can't recall at the moment), the porn industry is leading with DVD and the porn sites (and gambling) are one of the few profitable internet enterprises. Not sure whether this is a commentary on applied technology or human nature though
LL
Re:Some more stuff... (Score:1)
Thinking as an I1 user (Score:1)
It seems clear that I2 will be closed to "general public" for some time, then I wonder how this could affect the life of those who (like me) are already out of campus life.
I wonder if the text content available through I2 will be the same as the one we can reach by means of the Internet. It would be sad if I1 and I2 servers were separated and scientists decided to give a higher priority to I2 material (which they probably would), and we couldn't access new papers and so on. I believe servers will be separated (if not yet) for security reasons. If they aren't, someone may hack a way to use an I2 connection at some university through poor-cousin internet. The bandwidth bottleneck would still exist, but people would do it, either for the fun of it or for malicious reasons. (Disclaimer: I'm not encouraging anyone to do that.)
On the good side, I see this as, if not an embryo, at least a test bed for something that will be needed sooner or later: a replacement for the internet as we know it. The experience gathered with I2 will be a very usefull when the time comes to draw the standards for such a replacement. Intelligent routing, for instance, is a wonderfull idea.
As someone has already posted in a funny way, the small bandwidth relief originated by students using I2 instead of I1(?) is pretty welcome too!
-------------------------
Re:Why is the icon for the Internet... (Score:1)
Re:Internet II (Score:1)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
Well personnaly i think its colleges right to do that, the internet was developed in large part at the universites
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
> only have direct connections to so many others
ATM networking is the answert to this.
Connection-oriented networking - every system does
get a (virtual) connection to the others.
And ATM could be used for distributing all those
MP3s mentioned below.
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
A typical case when more hops is better is going from west coast to west coast between two providers with a public peering in MAE-West and a private peering somewhere else. If your packet goes via Mae West (lowest number of hops) it has a very good chance to get into congestion. So everyone is sending it via private peerings if available. And they may be on the other side of the US. Overall - more hops but faster and lower packet loss.
Overall, you are kind'a clueless... Read some books on routing architecture or the NANOG archives...
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:1)
colleges and universities in England and Wales.
It links both individual institutions at 34 or
155Mbps and MANs (such as the London MAN etc).
http://www.ja.net
Also, all the universities in Scotland are connected via a 155Mbps ATM network.
They use this, and have been using it, for near
broadcast quality videoconferencing via ATM codecs
(http://www.cellstack.com),
just like the goals of this Internet 2 project
(Only we're doing it right now in Scotland,
but somehow we Scots don't trumpet our achievements to the world).
Re:Internet-0 maybe (Score:1)
IIRC, they're up to Super-JANET 3 now
Least ways, back in 1997 when I had a job interview with Warwick University they had a Super-JANET 2 connection and where looking towards getting Super-JANET 3. (But then there where something of the 4(?) backbone usenet news hosts for JANET!).
(All of that is subject to being filtered through my exceedingly bad memory!)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
So packet networks are BAD and connection-oriented networks are GOOD, I seam to recall hearing that somewhere before.
I guess ATM networks are really good at keeping track of billions and billions of "virtual" connections, and a lot quicker to connect up new computer, to all other computers on "the ATM" than the Internet.
Re:Why is the icon for the Internet... (Score:1)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
The current state of Internet 2 (Score:1)
Interesting is that it is only open to US universities and that they need to cough up $25,000 membership fees and an investment of about $500,000 a year.
Throug Memoranda of Understandings Internet2 has teamed up with similar organisations across the globe. So though it might be silent, it cannot be said that the organisation is not among the living anymore.
Re:fast forward 5 years... (Score:1)
I just gave myself chills. I better quit while I'm ahead and go to work. Peace.
Re:I2... (Score:2)
I believe it is the gateway server out of the dorms -- I'm not sure what kind of machine it is, but it seems to drop packets like it's nooone's business. It makes playing Quake very difficult, with 25% packetloss.
Now that I found out that our school's an I2 member, I might just have to e-mail the admins here and ask (in more polite terms, of course) "wtf is going on d00ds???" =)
Re:Why is the icon for the Internet... (Score:1)
Re:The FibreSphere (Score:1)
I2 tidbits from the I2 FAQ (Score:1)
1. One goal is for advanced internet tech development and for application development for vital for research.
2. Universities (and some comercial partners) are taking the lead on the project considering that they need the resources that this project is working on creating - advanced tech and apps.
3. Cost for being part of I2 70 million per year for the universities (I think that is for all, not each). Additional funding, 30 million over the time of I2 creation from commercial sector, and unspecified amounts from NSF and other R&D grant making organizations.
4. What about getting in on it? Uni's that are not currently part of it can join if they have the funds to make the investment. The tech is expensive now but should come down into reach.
Re:That's the Internet II, eh? (Score:4)
There are good reasons to have a segment of the internet (or whatever the fsck you want to call a bunch of machines connected by fiber optics with the purpose of sharing data) reserved for academia. One, it was the academics that developed it to begin with. Two, do you have any idea the amount of data people in academia need to transfer? Probably not... I do.
When I was working on my PhD, I was performing large, 3D simulations on one of the Cray's at the NCSC. The data files for those simulations totaled 4.5 GB per simulation. For completeness, I had to run several of these simulations. Can you imagine how long it would have taken to download all that data on the same lines that all the "commercial users" use? Weeks or months. Even with I-2 access, it took me a couple of hours to download data from each of these simulations.
Now, before you start whining about preferential treatment of academics, ask yourself this question: Does (pick your {least?} favorite average user) *need* to download GBs of pr0n and mp3s? Does the academic's job depend on being able to access GBs of scientific data? My answers are No! and Yes! in that order...
My $1.47
Eric
Re:That's the Internet II, eh? (Score:1)
If you do it in the commercial market, the first question is "who gets the profit". This severely hampers some kinds of innovation (like the Internet itself).
Giving adequate bandwidth cheaply to people who are not your competitors is possible, and allows the innovation to occur that will tell the rest of us what to use that bandwidth for when we can get it.
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
except (Score:1)
Re:The FibreSphere (Score:2)
http://www.internet2.edu (Score:4)
"Reality is a self-induced hallucination."
To some in education it is an education internet.
To some in the military it is a DARPA internet project.
To some in business it is the future of the B-B eBusiness world internet.
I can not speak for internet-2, but I can say what I think ("AFT").
Internet-2 is a project with the intent to provide a developmental space for "Things to come.". Significantly greater bandwidth, vastly improved bandwidth utilization, resource management and control, and most importantly a truely enhanced functions and features rich environment for all internet users.
Internet-2 is advancing, discovering, and developing what will pe part of the future internet
Anyway this is a little of the way I look at the intent for the future internet. PLEASE, do not make the mistake of interpreting anything I said as a "1984 - Big Brother" concept. The future internet will be for the people just like today's internet. Dang Good Stuff on it's way to US folks and y'all. I just read about this stuff
WISE-YES and APES
1/3 as fast as internet 1 (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft ? (Score:1)
Re:The FibreSphere (Score:1)
Re:Thinking as an I1 user (Score:3)
I think perhaps you misunderstand what I2 is. You're not alone: it's a FAQ [internet2.edu]: Internet2 is not a physical network that will replace the Internet. Rather, Internet2's goal is to bring together institutions and resources to develop new technologies and capabilities that can then be deployed in the global Internet. Universities will maintain, and continue to experience substantial growth in the use of, existing Internet connections, which they will still obtain from commercial providers.
The point is, anything available on Internet2 is available to everyone; the only difference is that when packets are sent inside I2, they're routed a bit differently. While I'm talking, here's my response (quoting again from the FAQ) to the accusation that the whole idea is elitist and intended to take back the Internet away from grubby corporate interests: A key goal of this effort is to accelerate the diffusion of advanced Internet technology, in particular into the commercial sector.
There is no conspiracy here to disenfranchise the non-academic user.
Re:The FibreSphere (Score:1)
It's really simple. Those who were not obsessed with sex didn't survive -- they didn't breed fast enough or often enough. Darwinian evolution, survival of the fittest, you know...
Kaa
"Good Old Days" wistfulness? (Score:1)
Don't get me wrong. I like the idea of geeks, nerds, academics, scholars, and accelerated students having a mode of communication over which they can share information (and ultimately, commune) without added noise from web spiders, *@aol.com, MMF, spam, and pron-hocking sites. But I think you can do most of this over the Internet as it stands.
The poster is right to say that 'Internet 2' is a misleading name, because it gives the impression that someday, reasonably soon, the lumbering Internet being widely used today will be rebuilt with Internet 2 technology, the same way Amtrak might like to replace its old lumbering rail system with Acela technology, or the way the phone companies have mostly replaced the old analog system with a digital system, or the way car companies have replaced catalytic converters with fuel injectors. But the word is that it probably wont.
The goal/purpose of Internet 2, as it seems to stand, is to replace the academic backbone that the 'original' Internet once was. Despite geek wistfulness and a tenacity to history, it really should be called something else. Cable TV wasn't called Television 2, nor was FM radio called Radio-2. These both served the same purposes as their originals, and have come to largely replace them, just as Internet 2 is wont to do for the institutional origins of Internet 1.
But for the detractors of the new exclusive networks like I-2 and U2, have no fear. Someday (if not already), bofh.forsale will be created and it will all start to come crumbling down, again.
[OFF] "kleuge" (Score:1)
Still mostly just research (Score:1)
Possibly grad CS students in the new corporate research center get to play with it, but those are few and far; the main CS resources are enough for most students' projects involving things like FTP'ing large 3D data files, even if they do have to start it at 9PM and come back at 8Am to see the results. (After all, that's the way it was on the old Internet, too.)
Most of the CS research being done on I-2 there seem to be testing new high-speed protocols, not taking advantage of the speed for shipping monumentous research data in convenient amounts of time. (Besides, most of yall get 6 more weeks per term than NEU does. Plenty of time to finish your research.)
Other than that, a programmer turned sociology professor that I've done projects with has mentioned that they are also doing human-network interaction research with I-2.
Traceroutes from neu to mit go though BBN, just like you would expect.
Re:I2... (Score:1)
--
Re:"UW CS Networking" instructor (Score:1)
Dr. Jun Murai. Pretty cool class -- I was in it
and helped with the technical side for the last
"lecture" (dignitaries talking about how cool it was). Basically, take IPv6, multicast, and 40Mb/sec and see what you can do with it A/V wise.
There was an article in the NYT on it (don't have the link, it was in the 30DEC99 "Circuits" section).
And what's that "heaven help Japan" comment supposed to mean?
Drew
Re:I2... (Score:2)
Sounds like the system is working very well. University bandwidth isn't wasted between rival dorms. Sucks for you, works well for the people who need the bandwidth.
Re:"Good Old Days" wistfulness? (Score:1)
No. But there obviously are people who do. (The same holds for the spam-free, invitation-only Usenet 2.)
Despite geek wistfulness and a tenacity to history, it really should be called something else.
Why? It uses the same technology - protocols et al - which, if you read the RFCs, define Internet nodes. It's called "Internet 2" because it's a separate entity - don't just think that numbers mean sequels. This is not a movie.
'Bad design' and Internet II speed (Score:4)
As for I-2, it will be IPv6 based, but contrary to popular opinion IPv6 is not automagically faster or better than IPv4 - while v6 has many nice features such as autoconfiguration, auto-addressing, large address space, etc, there are very few features designed to make things go faster. All the technologies listed below apply equally to IPv6 and IPv4:
- MPLS - Multiprotocol Label Switching - allows administrator fine tuning of the routes taken across the network, e.g. to balance loads over the whole network, can also be used for VPNs and QoS.
- DiffServ - Differentiated Services - lets you assign a priority level to every packet (e.g. gold, silver, basic) and make gold packets get some guaranteed bandwidth or lower latency, hop by hop. Easy to deploy, does not give cast iron QoS guarantees.
- IntServ and RSVP - Integrated Services and Resource Reservation Protocol - lets applications request a certain QoS (bandwidth, latency, etc.) end to end across a network. Harder to deploy across a network, and has scalability problems, but these are gradually being addressed and it does give end to end guarantees.
There is one neat feature in IPv6 that supports RSVP - it's called the Flow Label, and is basically a number that is assigned to all packets in a given 'flow' (e.g. a video session). By assigning this number, RSVP routers after the first one in the path can go somewhat faster since they only need to look at one field rather than checking src/dest IP addresses/ports.
Windows 2000 includes many QoS features, particularly RSVP/IntServ and DiffServ, but not IPv6. RSVP is available for Linux, IPv6 is available in early form, and the Linux-DiffServ project is one of the most advanced implementations of DiffServ that is publicly available.
For more information on QoS, see http://www.qosforum.com/docs/glossary/glossary.ht
Of course, the ability to send traffic over big fat optical pipes is available to v4 and v6. However, the cost of ASICs probably dictates that gigabit/terabit routers may only support IPv4 for some time, until v6 becomes more widely deployed. However, I-2 may well be using early versions of v6 gigabit routers.
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
*sigh* You missed the point. If Internet2 gets clogged up with consumer junk like Internet1 did, the schools will start lobbying to build Internet3 so they can get some work done.
If you want public packet communication to be fast and efficient, tell your ISP how much you'd pay for fast and efficient. If enough people do this, they'll get it.
Re:I2 Speed (Score:1)
Re: it's not THAT interesting. (Score:3)
We'll assume I2 is much like a Tier1 provider on the currect system the rest of us are stuck with.
here's a few prices (from boardwatch.com) (the highest bandwidth listed from each backbone)
UUNET : 155Mbps = $179k/month
C&W : 21Mbps = $20.8k/month
GTE : 45Mbps = $55k/month
Sprint 155Mbps = 160k/month
I mean, you can't just hook people up, even if you are non-profit, without having some staffing, routers, utility & housing costs, etc.
Re:You're stupid (Score:1)
Since when does the word "Internet" have any reference to users, much less require "individuals"? (what's an individual anyway?) Internet is just that - an inter-network network. That is, it is a network that connects subnetworks. This term was chosen because the Internet connects thousands of organizations and their networks together. The Internet 2 also connects many organizations' networks, just not as many (and more selective) as Internet 1.
Oh dear. You disagree with me, so I'm stupid. Get out of bed the wrong side?
Now to address your points:
internet (small i) is taken to mean a network that connects other networks, which fits your argument.
Internet (small I) is taken to mean THE Internet, which is a network that is publically available and (amongst other purposes) transfers mail, files and information. As such, Internet-2 is a direct referral to the current Internet (big I) and that IS available to individuals (an individual is exactly what it says it is, look it up in a dictionary if you don't know what an individual is). So yes, within the currently understood context, "Internet" does have reference to being available to individuals.
Your argument would carry more weight if 1) you didn't insult people as part of it and 2) you posted from an account rather than anonymously
Re:Still mostly just research (Score:1)
D-rock
Re:I2... (Score:1)
So I2 is now a haven for cheesy little Gopher servers, FTP sites with the latest patches for XTrek, and a sandbox for little toy projects from disgruntled CS professors and their grad student lackies? Sign me up!! Seriously, you say that as if what was happening on the Internet in the late '80s-early '90s was somehow better than what you can do with the Internet now.
The truth is that there was no common standard for data interchange beyond a flat ASCII file. TeX documents were the norm and to read them, you had to print them out. There was no way to build collaborative systems short of cobbling together a bunch of homemade C code and trying to convince others to use it. And the AVERAGE bandwidth of the Internet "backbone" was sub-T1.
Anyone who longs for the "golden days" of the Internet either wasn't there, or isn't participating in today's net in any meaningful way. It just wasn't that exciting.
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:3)
No! Keep the average person OFF of i2. I2 is there for very (very. 30fps full quality video and sound) high bandwidth applications which absolutely requite obscene bandwidth and QoS. What does Joe Net really need with i2? Nothing. He just wants his mp3s and porn and AOL. The internet already provides him with everything he needs.
The same goes for slashdot geeks. Only a select few have any business having access to i2.
I want students and researchers having the best quality i2 they can get. They are the ones who need it the most, not every silly bastard with an @home account.
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
The web did not kill the "net as we used to know it" - filling the web with advertising did. Many of the newsgroups that have been abandoned have been abandoned due to spam.
I have little hope for I-2, myself - the corporate sponsor thing is indicative of the intention to use it for the same commercial crap filling up the original internet.
As long as any network allows commercial advertising, the signal-to-noise ratio will suck.
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:2)
The swedish equivalent (Sunet [sunet.se]) is also at 155Mbps, but something tells me it's user base is somewhat smaller... or is it? Maybe the UK universities don't grant their students free 10Mbps connections. (Great for quake *grin*)
An aside: the finnish one, aside from being bloody fast, has the best name: FUNET!
-
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:2)
Daniel
warez, mp3, etc (Score:1)
happening? With Joe Suburb that takes two minutes
to download a song over a 56K line or Joe College
who can do it in a couple seconds?
Re:The FibreSphere (Score:1)
Yup, definitely academics... (Score:3)
"Students are actually using the Internet to learn about networking," explains Greg Wood Director of the Internet II Project
who'da thunk it?
Find out for yourself... (Score:3)
http://www.internet2.edu [internet2.edu] -- The main website for the project.
I have seen many comments that seem to equate I2 with a "private WAN" for universities. I think a better description would be that member institutions have private peering, i.e. I am at the University of Oklahoma, and I have traffic that needs to go to hotmail.com, it gets routed through ONENET then off to Cable and Wireless, etc. If I have traffic that needs to go to MIT, it gets routed through the Abilene network and off to the MBONE. Individual PCs on our campus network do not have to "subscribe" as the University pays something on the order of $30K per month to be a member institution.
Incidentally, a happy side effect is that I could theoretically get ridiculous ping times from the dorms at OU to a QIII server at Stanford, since many institutions I know of will not be crazy enough to try to filter what traffic goes on the I2 link. (Most of the POPs will be at something like OC12 @ 622Mbps)
Re:Internet-0 maybe (Score:2)
I recall CNN doing a piece on "Internet 2" in 1995. They claimed that we'd all be using the newer, more highspeed internet 2 around now. The problem is that Universities don't want all the average grubbies on their private highspeed WAN.
Thing back to the early 1980s. The internet was a rather large research project, mixing military and educational computers, and allowing them to share data. Then the "great unwashed" and Big Business (tm) gradually found out about it, and started using it. At this point, the universities recognized that they needed a new architecture, free from some of the original design flaws of the internet, and free from some of the less desirable people (script kiddies, anyone?). Internet 2 also allows them to test and implement new things. Gigabit routers, IPv6, etc.
Their developments will trickle down to the internet, but don't hold your breath for general access.
---
Internet 2 Myths... (Score:1)
First, Internet 2 is not necessarily a general-purpose network. It is used primarily for research in high-performance computing and really cool stuff like telemedicine and video multicast conferences.
Second, you can't get pr0n or mp3's or things like that from the network unless they're hosted at a member institution's site. You can't connect to the regular internet from I2. Can you imagine NCSA hosting the most realistic "virtual girlfriend" simulation? Well, okay, maybe not a great example
Third, the new applications and experience gained from Internet 2 could be well applied in the future on the Next generation Internet [ngi.gov]. This is where regular folks can get the advantages of a high-speed network and maybe not even know it.
Of course, I'm crazy about anything that's new and "neat," as I'm sure most people reading this are. However, I can't wait to (maybe, just maybe) get to work with this project and help develop things that might lead to better science, better global connections, and Quake II games that don't slow down... er.. anyway. -AC
Allen Cain
Internet 2 Access (Score:1)
In fact, I'm still running RH 5.2 (2.2.13-rtl2.0) which I downloaded from uiuc and installed in fifteen minutes when I was on campus last spring...
Re:Find out for yourself... (Score:1)
Re:I2... (Score:1)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
try it with a 4:1 conversion rate, takes up 90% cpu on an old 486, but it works
at 441khz No stereo, only mono.....
at 22khz you can get stereo, although sound quality sucks...
Re:[OFF] "kleuge" (Score:1)
Re:All this bandwidth only for colleges... (Score:1)
There are too many commercial entities on the internet ruining what was supposed to be an educational and community oriented backbone.
What was supposed to be an open platform, has been closed up by greedy corporations. People with ideologies that are 180deg out from the ideologies of people that created the internet.
I'm not just referring to those corps that "close" the protocols and standards, but also those that "close" the flow of freedom (such as the resent lawsuits over domain names, et al.)
It just makes my ill.....
Re:The FibreSphere (Score:1)
Remember what disk space and RAM used to cost before Windoze 9x? Just because you're not part of the waste, it doesn't mean you can't take advantage of the economy-of-scale that it creates.
---
Re:Internet 2 Access (Score:1)
Comment from someone directly involved (Score:3)
This wasn't just a one time deal, it was actually a series of scheduled lectures, some originating in Japan, others originating in the US. On the US side, the professor teaching the class was Prof. Larry Landweber at the University of Wisconsin Madison, one of the people who helped create CSNet back in ArpaNet days. On the Japan side it was Prof. Jun Murai at Keio University who is often refered to as the Internet guru in Japan. Larry and Jun are good friends and had been wanting to do something like this for a while.
The lectures themselves were basically video-conferences. Using Sony DV equipment, the audio and video streams were sent across Internet/2 infrastructure. Someone mentioned that they didn't see what this has to do with IPv6. The Internet/2 on its own doesn't, however, this project utilized IPv6 going over ATM. There was no compression used in this, so bandwidth usage was around 35-40 Mbps. For the most part, it worked very well with amazing video and audio quality.
I've been told that this was the first time that regularly scheduled video content was sent from the US to Asia over the Internet/2. It was amazing to see it work. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to e-mail me.
Sam Etler
UW Madison
CSL Networking
Dave Farber on I2 (Score:2)
Hopefully it means that if universities want to continue building their ivory tower, they won't be doing it with my tax dollars (or not as many, anyway).
Re:The FibreSphere (Score:1)
All they do is master it with footage shot on crappy videotape, with a few seconds of multi-angle content. Until they get it right, the only advantages are that the tape doesn't break the second time you watch it, and the smaller DVD case is easier to hide than those oversized VHS boxes.
Call me paranoid but.... (Score:2)
this is true today! (Score:1)
Re:I2... (Score:2)
Internet2 (I2) isn't the network. I2 is the initiative to develop Internet technologies (like QoS and multicast) and applications that will eventually be migrated to the commodity Internet. I2 uses, primarily, the Abilene backbone which is part of the I2 project. Abilene is a 2.4 Gbps backbone network that has a strict Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) i.e. it's not for playing Quake! It's for researchers with real demanding network applications to develop.
Unless you've got a research project that needs QoS or other advanced services, your packets will never see Abilene nor should they. It's your schools commodity Internet connection, WAN or LAN that sucks. Sean Fulton Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center
Erm... (Score:2)
- A.P.
--
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
This.. (Score:2)