nanog mailing list archives
Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet!
From: Ray Soucy <rps () maine edu>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 07:24:51 -0500
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. Links from clients to server that are permanent. Or 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. But 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. 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, I 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. The web is going to change in a few years, from a "request" "reply" interchange network, to something more like a computer "bus". I don't know how the "wires" will react to this. On 30 December 2011 10:58, Vitkovsky, Adam <avitkovsky () emea att com> wrote:Actually an a Cisco presentation on Nexus 7k I asked whether it's possible to transport the FCoE over let's say EoMPLS or VPLS and did not get a straight answer though that was half a year ago -but it would be really cool to connect hard-drives directly over continents 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.-- -- ℱin del ℳensaje.
-- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/
Current thread:
- next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Christopher Morrow (Dec 29)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Tom Hill (Dec 29)
- RE: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Holmes,David A (Dec 29)
- RE: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Vitkovsky, Adam (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Tei (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Ray Soucy (Dec 30)
- RE: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Vitkovsky, Adam (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Ray Soucy (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Aiden Sullivan (Dec 30)
- RE: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Vitkovsky, Adam (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Jay Ashworth (Dec 30)
- RE: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Vadim Antonov (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Tom Hill (Dec 29)
- RE: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Robert Bonomi (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Jay Ashworth (Dec 30)
- Re: next-best-transport! down with ethernet! Joe Hamelin (Dec 30)