  DrModemPremium
join:2006-10-19
USA
kudos:1 | 322 tbps? I WANT. (+ Google FFTH plz) | |
|
 | Reviews:
 ·Time Warner Cable
| Re: 322 tbps? That came to mind when I heard this on Bloomberg this morning around 7:45 CDT this morning. Im like google just got a hand up they were expecting 120Gbit per second not 322terabits per second I need to check the stock price!
lets just hope this doesnt consolidate IP networks company wide as this will hurt IT badly. OK if it is backbone then that is ok and they can do that but leave local support and local switches alone.
This will help IPs set up a one/two router system in there entire backone one to two for redundancy so they dont shut down a company.
Im taking CISCO classes right now so this will affect me peronally. Im going for an associates that is called Network System administraror and it includes voip so I could go to work for someone who has voip and specialize in it such as AT&T or Verizon and only work on voip or go farther and get my bachelors which can get me more job(s).
12 credits down 52 more to go but after this semster is over 24 credits down yeah and it is a four technical university equivilant to TEXAS TECH, or PENN TECH but on a way smaller scale.
Go nitany lions they dont affect texas unless in the BCS championship so cypherstream your safe for the most part(just kidding)
I like the lions football out of all of the BIG10 schools so when they launched BIG10 here in 2008 in north texas I was like sweet.
I have the sports tier so I get BIG10. | |
|
| | WhatNowPremium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC | Re: 322 tbps? Don't waste your time at at&t if you really want a career in IT. | |
|
| | |  espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| Re: 322 tbps? said by WhatNow:Don't waste your time at at&t if you really want a career in IT. Not universally true. AT&T GCSC (Global Client Support Center) is basically outsourced IT management for enterprise customers. Getting a job there can definitely be a gateway to other Fortune 500 companies. | |
|
| | The Blind People are coming up with solutions and yet we still have no comprehensive broadband policy. How sad
Thats a pretty big tag to pay for R&D, nice job Cisco
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! | |
|
|  swhx7Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
1 edit | Re: The Blind So my traffic may go thru that thing in a microsecond, but it's still only 5Mb/from TWC to my house, 300kb up. Yeah we need a public broadband policy. | |
|
| mdrift
join:2003-08-15
Spokane, WA | said by S_engineer:People are coming up with solutions and yet we still have no comprehensive broadband policy. How sad Thats a pretty big tag to pay for R&D, nice job Cisco The Telcos will upgrade for Wireless and Wired first on their major points of traffic interchange.
That reduction will have an impact.
Add a comprehensive broadband plan will be easier to swallow in Congress when technology like this is ready to assist and produce the results claimed. | |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Clearwire Wireless
1 edit | Sweet! Now I can take a 2nd mortgage out on my house, buy one of these and hook this bad boy up to my DSL line. I'll be the fastest surfin dude on the block! Oh wait, I would need a million DSL lines to even utilize a fraction of the bandwidth. Living at the end of the last mile really bites! | |
|
| | Now MSOs can STFU about metered billing too Imagine that | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Now MSOs can STFU about metered billing too Cisco's router doesn't magically turn coax into fiber unfortunately... | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Now MSOs can STFU about metered billing too MSOs long-running complaint nowadays is that heavy users should pay for the bandwidth they consume as though subscribers are pushing up carrier's costs of delivering network access besides addressing issues of local saturation on the coax network.
Now that DOCSIS 3 is here, that should make the argument of saturation finally die, except it hasn't. | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Now MSOs can STFU about metered billing too There's "only" 152 Mbps of capacity on a four channel DOCSIS 3 node, so still not a ton... | |
|
| | | brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | said by Network Guy:Now that DOCSIS 3 is here, that should make the argument of saturation finally die, except it hasn't. DOCSIS 3 cannot magically make a network segment have unlimited bandwidth. The network segments can still be saturated. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·EPB Fiber Optics
| HA! quote:
You know, take it home, set it up next to your 1.5 Mbps DSL modem, and pretend you're beating the hell out of the Exaflood.
HAHA!  | |
|
|  belushiPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-08
Twinsburg, OH | Re: HA! 90K for the router? That must include the chassis and nothing else. I have to believe that the cost of the various modules that comprise the device for the carriers would push the price tag up to at least 10 times that for a "standard deployment" whatever that would entail. | |
|
| | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| Re: HA! said by belushi:90K for the router? That must include the chassis and nothing else. Exactly.
The CRS-1 is 7 figures on the invoice before it actually is in a configuration to do anything. The CRS-3 isn't going to be cheaper. | |
|
|
| | | Re: Karl Fixed, thank you. | |
|
 RobP
join:2008-03-30
Burlington, ON | Buy Now! Never have to upgrade ever again!
Future proof your network!
Will last over 1000 years*!
Blistering Fast Speeds**!
*Please note that ISPs will require 1000 years of notice prior to upgrading your node.
**Service includes UPTO 322 Terabits per second | |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
1 edit | This makes even less sense than the Exaflood argument According to the networking company, the new CRS-3 router technology they've spent $1.6 billion developing is capable of transmitting data at about 322 Terabits per second, which Cisco claims is twelve-times faster than their closest competitor. Apparently, people pushing the Exaflood myth since 2007 will need to construct a new bogeyman. Backbone capacity was never what the Exaflood propaganda was addressing, and even so -- this is about router backplane throughput which has absolutely nothing to do with interface capacity.
Making this statement is like saying the US GDP is $14 trillion, so all those people bitching about poverty need to construct some new facts to sell their agenda.
Also, $90k is just the chassis cost -- it gets a little more expensive when you add in power supplies and line cards so that it will actually do something. | |
|
| |
| |  swintecPremium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:3
1 edit | Re: This makes even less sense than the Exaflood argument I guess in the end, that is what counts, right? 
--
Block Accounts | UseNet Now | |
|
| | | | It is relevant, because Cisco has been a big proponent of the exaflood argument, and has given tons of cash to the lobby shops pushing this myth around DC. | |
|
| Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
1 edit | Re: This makes even less sense than the Exaflood argument Backbone capacity was never what the Exaflood propaganda was addressing. Well one, the Exaflood propaganda wasn't "addressing" anything. It was crap logic, using fear to sell networking gear, or to convince stupid regulators to deregulate if they didn't want the Internet to implode. Two, since 2007 groups like Nemertes Research and other exaflooders (including Cisco) predicted problems at both the core and the last mile resulting in broad brownouts Internet wide. Cisco was part of pushing this crap into the public consciousness....now their CRS-3 marketing claims highlight how the new technology alleviates these problems....so talk to Cisco. | |
|
| | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| Re: This makes even less sense than the Exaflood argument said by Karl Bode:Well one, the Exaflood propaganda wasn't "addressing" anything. It was crap logic, using fear to sell networking gear, or to convince stupid regulators to deregulate if they didn't want the Internet to implode. You do the same shit, Karl. You create editorial after editorial about how providers need to upgrade their networks because all kinds of high bandwidth applications are going to catch on any day now. The only difference is the Exaflood folks make more money doing it, and their arguments are more finely polished.
said by Karl Bode:Two, since 2007 groups like Nemertes Research and other exaflooders (including Cisco) predicted problems at both the core and the last mile resulting in broad brownouts Internet wide. Cisco was part of pushing this crap into the public consciousness.... Path congestion could still very well be an issue, but I haven't seen anyone argue core limitations in any of the propaganda I've read. Yes, I'll acknowledge the Exaflood propaganda is garbage, but it's only made worse by your misinterpretation of it.
I've actually been to the lead Sprintlink NOC in Reston,VA and the old UUNet NOC in Cary, NC. Backbone operators have growth down to a science, and the tools exist at that well-funded position of the network (wholesale bandwidth) to continue to meet all anticipated growth demands.
said by Karl Bode:now their CRS-3 marketing claims highlight how the new technology alleviates these problems....so talk to Cisco. Their claims are aggregate throughput, which everyone in the industry knows is misleading, and you're taking it one step further by relating it to yet another marketing campaign in the Exaflood devaluing the meaning even further. Augmenting core capacity isn't going to do squat when the key bottleneck in path congestion is the last mile.
To reach 322Terabit you'd need a minimum of 70 chassis fully populated with 40Gig interface line cards in each slot with a bill of materials price well over 9 figures. Who is spending that kind of money at a single site? | |
|
| | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
4 edits | Re: This makes even less sense than the Exaflood argument You do the same shit, Karl. You create editorial after editorial about how providers need to upgrade their networks because all kinds of high bandwidth applications are going to catch on any day now. Technically, most of my editorials focus on the fact that carriers should put the money back into the network instead of suckling at the teet of myopic investors who put immediate returns ahead of the company's long-range future or consumers. I also frequently argue that a lack of competition in the sector impacts said investment.
I've never argued that "providers need to upgrade their networks because all kinds of high bandwidth applications are going to catch on any day now," and in fact I've often argued that 100 Mbps home connections are largely marketing. But sure, if it makes you feel better to think my ten years of work here on hundreds of topics is the same thing as fake industry science used to con the public, fine. That's sweet. Wrong, and insulting as shit, but sweet.
Ironic though that you'd distort my positions and then complain about me distorting positions.Yes, I'll acknowledge the Exaflood propaganda is garbage, but it's only made worse by your misinterpretation of it. Yes, clearly the problem is with me misrepresenting fake junk science based on completely fabricated data by pointing out that it's junk science based on completely fabricated data.Augmenting core capacity isn't going to do squat when the key bottleneck in path congestion is the last mile. I believe I already agreed with you. The story you're commenting on that I wrote says the same thing. I also appreciate your network insights and they make excellent sense. But again, I'd argue the core enemy of your tirade would be Cisco's marketing department.
Either the world as we know it is ending due to network management and capacity problems (that can only be fixed by "X" -- deregulation, fewer consumer protections, whatever), or the CRS-3 helps put those fears to bed and network engineers are savvy enough to consistently be ahead of capacity demand. The industry doesn't get to argue both things when it's convenient for them. | |
|
| | | |
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Optimum Online
·EarthLink
| Phone call capacity quote:
to allow every man, woman and child in China to make a video call, simultaneously.
Note that capacity is reduced if the 'send all the data to the Pentagon, CIA, and Homeland Security without a warrant' option is included. | |
|
| FisamoPremium
join:2004-02-20
Apex, NC | Re: Phone call capacity Who says that's an option?  | |
|
|  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by Bobcat: Note that capacity is reduced if the 'send all the data to the Pentagon, CIA, and Homeland Security without a warrant' option is included.* *Such option doesn't exist. Part of built in feature set. It's enabled under all conditions.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | My man LastMile... LastMile looks at this prospected speed upgrade and burps "bottleneck," at no one in particular, and then goes back to drinking it's Mad Dog 20/20 clutching it's pickled eggs with fervor. | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: My man LastMile... I'll take 20/20...f we're talking 20/20 FTTH. | |
|
| | | | Re: My man LastMile... No I'm not talking about a 20/20 symmetrical connection, I'm more likely dating myself (read as: calling myself OLD) with a reference to a cheap wine that wine-o's drink. | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: My man LastMile... I know  Just taking things out of context for the heck of it. | |
|
| | |  japPremium
join:2003-08-10
038xx | said by axiomatic:I'm more likely dating myself (read as: calling myself OLD) Works out the same regardless of which way I read it.
| |
|
 jjoshuaPremium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
kudos:1
1 edit | How much SPAM can you send with 322Tb of bandwidth? | |
|
| |
| | | said by jjoshua:can you send with 322Tb of bandwidth? Spam will expand to fill capacity (plus, supply will always exceed demand). | |
|
 pokesphIt Is Almost FastPremium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1 | The Universe And Mankind Forever! 42 | |
|
| | Meh I have a Gigabyte Internet connection!!!
But my CAP is only 10 Megabytes. =/
Only in America | |
|
| | | Re: Meh I know right!! Living in Cuba would be so much better! | |
|
| | | It's Gigabit not Gigabyte when measuring data transfer speeds. | |
|
| | Sweet!!! Instead of that fancy CRS-thingamabobber why doesn't AT&T just upgrade everyone to fiber. Then we can all bitch about our new fiber connections and how underutilised they are. | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Sweet!!! Because a $200,000 router is less expensive than upgrading 250 customers to fiber... | |
|
| | chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Sweet!!! Also this router doesn't solve that problem. What this does is allow you to plug a ton of core devices together and use it to exchange data at 322Tbps. So you can connect 808 OC-768 connections together and have them all route at full speed. This could be used to route individual connections that go as fast as 10Tb easily (given the backpane to connection speed ratios I'm familiar with at least). | |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Cool... Wonder whether Verizon and Comcast will buy these for core routers.
For everyone else it's completely overkill.
Okay, maybe Facebook could use one... | |
|
| espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Cool... said by iansltx:Wonder whether Verizon and Comcast will buy these for core routers. For everyone else it's completely overkill. It's only applicable to wholesale carriers -- Level(3), TeliaSonera, Verizon, Sprint, Comcast, etc. It has absolutely no relevance to any kind of end-user attachment nor would it have any impact on commercial or residential service delivery.
The CRS platform is about expanded multi-chassis density. Whereas standard router platforms have integrated stage 1 (Ingress) / stage 2 (backplane switching) / stage 3 (Egress) and you simply insert modules, the CRS architecture allows you to move the S2 process into a special fiber cabinet and scale your connectivity across multiple chassis all linked together via the fiber cabinet. Comcast is already doing this on the CRS-1 platform today at the core of their N*40G backbone.
The CRS-3 is simply an evolution in that architecture to allow greater density of 40/100G interfaces. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Cool... Understood.
That said, higher density = cheaper in the long run, so I'd expect that Comcast et al will benefit on the bottom line frm deploying these things. Also might allow for more speed upgrades on the last mile, particularly for FTTH providers like Verizon, since higher speeds on the last mile will translate into higher peak bandwidth on the core... | |
|
| | | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Cool... said by iansltx:That said, higher density = cheaper in the long run, so I'd expect that Comcast et al will benefit on the bottom line frm deploying these things. They only benefit if they needed higher density. Ie, a 747 doesn't do you a lot of good if all you needed was a Cessna. The maintenance will eventually kill you.
said by iansltx:Also might allow for more speed upgrades on the last mile, particularly for FTTH providers like Verizon, since higher speeds on the last mile will translate into higher peak bandwidth on the core... That would only be true if capacity at the core was the limiting factor, and it's not.
You also have to keep in mind that the 322Terabit is an aggregate value. The per-slot capacity on each individual chassis is still 100Gbps, so you have to link 70-100 CRS chassis together (depending on the line card types) to reach that throughput number in aggregate. Nobody is doing that, not even Cisco. | |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | LAN party Everyone will be a zero ping bastard | |
|
| |  Big Deal!
| |
|
|
|
See 9 replies to this post |
|
| | WOOT I think I will put one on order and hold lan parties with it | |
|
Core0000Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY Reviews:
·New Wave Communi..
| Article "But hey, you can still take the CRS-3 home with you for $90,000 (starting price) when it officially launches during the third quarter of this year. You know, take it home, set it up next to your 1.5 Mbps DSL modem, and pretend you're beating the hell out of the Exaflood."
Lmao.
Some good news is better than no news I suppose. | |
|
|
|
