[FoRK] Two bits (for Ken, Sean)

Sean Conner sean at conman.org
Wed Feb 3 14:12:41 PST 2010


It was thus said that the Great Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo once stated:
> --- On Wed, 2/3/10, Sean Conner <sean at conman.org> wrote:
> 
> > How many here *could* afford a full duplex 100Mb/sec Internet
> > connection?
> 
> Actually, I would settle for a full duplex T1. 

  The full duplex T1 will set you back a few hundred a month, plus don't
forget the router (maybe another hundred or so for a used Cisco 2500/2600
series router) and tech to come out and configure it (unless you know Cisco
IOS).

> xDSL sucks if you want to
> send anything big. Why haven't they implemented the adaption techniques
> that were developed for high-speed analogue modems in the 80's. They are
> asymmetrical but they load-sense and switch the fat pipe to the direction
> with the traffic. No reason xDSL couldn't do exactly the same thing.

  No reason, except money.  Why do you think most DSL providers include
"running no servers" in their TOS?  Businesses can expect to pay more for a
given pipe size than a residential user (although on the flip side, you get
better SLAs as a business than as a residential user---so that's where the
money goes).  

  Also, the common use case for DSL is residential use---little upload but
huge downloads, with their network geared for this.  A business may have a
similar profile, unless they host their own web server (in which case it's
the residential profile flipped) or email server (in which case it's
symetrical both ways, given spam levels and infected Windows servers).  

  And for all I know, DSLAMs (the hardware that runs DSL in the CO [1]) may
be able to switch traffic---it's just not configured to do that.  Or perhaps
it's the consumer grade routers that can't support it (cheaper to make that
way).

> It flat pisses me off that the mavens of digital, to this day, refuse to
> believe there's anything to be learned from the analogue world.

  It's not that we refuse to learn---it's just that it's messier 8-P  An
analog sort routine is O(1), but getting the spaghetti strings (representing
the data) cut and bundled together takes O(n).  

  I did have access to an analog computer in college, but given that

	1) the programs were stored on a 3'x3' faceplate
	2) there were only two faceplates as I recall
	3) and both faceplates were being used by
		a) one grad student and
		b) one professor

  meant I didn't get to use it all that much (although if pressed, I
probably could have, although I struggled through analog electroncs).

  -spc (Hmmm ... I could run fiber optic between my house and The Office,
	only costs about $3k for the cable alone, but getting the rights of
	way along the way may prove difficult ... )

[1]	Telco speak for "Central Office" which isn't a central office in the
	"where all the employees work" meaning but in the "thus begins the
	last mile out to the customers" meaning.


More information about the FoRK mailing list