iptrans

5 ms·

1.
by iptrans 3y ago
Obvious caveats: GPON networks are often vendor locked. This means you cannot just buy any random SFP ONU and expect it work. Even if you do get it to work, no ISP will offer you any kind of support if you do this. Some might even take to i
2.
by iptrans 3y ago
Bulk transfers aren’t that being interesting from a networking perspective. You gonna have a bad time if you optimize only for the best case scenario. Even using IMIX is a low bar. The proper way to do things is linerate using small packets
3.
by iptrans 3y ago
Interrupt moderation only gives a modest improvement, as can be seen from the benchmarking done by Intel. Intel would also not have gone through the effort to develop DPDK if all you had to do to achieve linerate performance would be to ena
4.
by iptrans 3y ago
TCP/IP offload isn’t the issue. The core problem is that the Linux kernel uses interrupts for handling packets. This limits Linux networking performance in terms of packets per second. The limit is about a million packets per second pe
5.
by iptrans 4y ago
Google fiber had very specific requirements for their build-out. Not all locations were able or equipped to meet those demands. Other than that, what specific regulation are you referring to? More often than not it’s the economics that prev
6.
by iptrans 4y ago
Does not help. Tor is heavily throttled and blocked.
7.
by iptrans 4y ago
Oh, sweet summer child, do you think you can escape the NSA? :) More seriously, private ISPs in a (local) government owned open access network does not mean the (local) government controls and observes everything. If you are afraid of the l
8.
by iptrans 4y ago
What could possibly go right? Read the comment about NZ. Or refer to Sweden.
9.
by iptrans 4y ago
There is only so much wireless spectrum. Multiple companies are allowed to lay fiver. It’s not regulation that prevents overbuilding but economics.
10.
by iptrans 4y ago
> An ISP grows a large user base by doing aggressive price competition, then starts shaking down services, rate limiting their traffic if they don't pay up. Yeah, we’ve already seen this in the Comcast/Netflix debacle and Deutc
11.
by iptrans 4y ago
Sound like you are probably just overpaying for bandwidth and/or DDoS protection.
12.
by iptrans 4y ago
BGP doesn’t work that way. You cannot control who your prefix is announced to, unless you control all the paths on the Internet.
13.
by iptrans 4y ago
Only for outbound traffic, tho. For eyeball networks and other stub networks this is mostly fine.
14.
by iptrans 4y ago
I’m interested to hear how you 1) block 2 Tbps of attack traffic 2) save $500k per month in bandwidth charges since blocking at the border means you have to pay for the incoming bandwidth
15.
by iptrans 4y ago
Because your ISP is not keen on paying for third parties transiting their network.
16.
by iptrans 4y ago
The switch does not care what kind of optics you use. You can use a $50 switch is you like. The 200 km optics, however, cost about a grand each.
17.
by iptrans 4y ago
Until recently NBN fiber connections only came with 2 Mbps of bandwidth. Any usage over that was billed at $8 per Mbps to the ISP. In other words, an ISP customer taking full advantage of their gigabit fiber connection could cost the ISP al
18.
by iptrans 4y ago
The Australian NBN would also have sucked a lot less if the government hadn’t sneaked in usage fees on the network. It is, or at least was, insanely expensive to use the Australian next generation network. It cost ISPs providing service on
19.
by iptrans 4y ago
Everything you wanted to know about optical networking - but were afraid to ask https://www.nanog.org/news-stories/nanog-tv/top-talks/tutori... You can check pricing on any of the many online stores, such as
20.
by iptrans 4y ago
I think you are overstating the problems of relying on IP transit somewhat. A typical content creator is unlikely to have enough demand for their videos to congest IP transit links. IP transit is also very, very cheap. At scale IP transit
21.
by iptrans 5y ago
You are very, very mistaken. Only 28% of Alexa top 1000 sites support IPv6. Very, very few, if any, consumers of commercial ISPs have only IPv6 access.
22.
by iptrans 5y ago
The Internet does not work without IPv4. It’s either CGNAT or ponying up $60 per IPv4 address.
23.
by iptrans 5y ago
Time to build a wireless link to your friend :)
24.
by iptrans 5y ago
I can see this being used for backhaul in remote areas. There’s a bit of a risk for adverse selection, as anybody willing to spend $500 per month on this is going to want to get their money's worth.
25.
by iptrans 5y ago
This is a straw man. Physical path redundancy for backhaul and/or feeders does not require two of everything, merely that you close the loop.
26.
by iptrans 5y ago
Having redundant cable paths to service 30k subscribers is economically feasible.
27.
by iptrans 5y ago
It may be normal, but it’s still poor engineering practice.
28.
by iptrans 5y ago
Hasn’t Comcast heard about proper network design techniques? Redundancy is a well defined concept for a reason. Two is one and one is none.
29.
by iptrans 5y ago
Back in the day dial-up over GSM was supported via Circuit Switched Data (CSD). However, many carriers discontinued support for CSD when it was superseded by GPRS and EDGE. Furthermore, even if this was supported, it would most likely be tu
30.
by iptrans 5y ago
Sounds like the Land Registry is missing a NoTransfers bit in their settings for properties.

More ›