nanog mailing list archives
Re: 60 ms cross-continent
From: Rod Beck <rod.beck () unitedcablecompany com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 23:49:57 +0000
Have you accounted for glass as opposed to vacuum? And the fact that fiber optic networks can't be straight lines if their purpose is to aggregate traffic along the way and they also need to follow some less-than-straight right of way. Regards, Roderick. ________________________________ From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+rod.beck=unitedcablecompany.com () nanog org> on behalf of Stephen Satchell via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 9:37 PM To: nanog () nanog org <nanog () nanog org> Subject: Re: 60 ms cross-continent On 6/22/20 12:59 AM, adamv0025 () netconsultings com wrote:
William Herrin Howdy, Why is latency between the east and west coasts so bad? Speed of light accounts for about 15ms each direction for a 30ms round trip. Where does the other 30ms come from and why haven't we gotten rid of it?Wallstreet did :) https://www.wired.com/2012/08/ff_wallstreet_trading/
“Of course, you’d need a particle accelerator to make it work.” So THAT'S why CERN wants to build an even bigger accelerator than the LHC!
Current thread:
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent, (continued)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Joel Jaeggli (Jun 20)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Carsten Bormann (Jun 20)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Marshall Eubanks (Jun 20)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Rubens Kuhl (Jun 21)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Brett Frankenberger (Jun 21)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Alejandro Acosta (Jun 21)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Rubens Kuhl (Jun 21)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Eric Kuhnke (Jun 21)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Carsten Bormann (Jun 20)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Joel Jaeggli (Jun 20)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Stephen Satchell via NANOG (Jun 22)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Rod Beck (Jun 22)
- RE: 60 ms cross-continent adamv0025 (Jun 23)
- Re: 60 ms cross-continent Rod Beck (Jun 23)