Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > yankees invented the internet now they want to destroy it....

Reply
Thread Tools

yankees invented the internet now they want to destroy it....

 
 
news.xtra.co.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2005
Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed at
the freedom we had today....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
steve
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2005
news.xtra.co.nz wrote:

> Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
> Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
> at the freedom we had today....
>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule


TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here.

If you want a free Internet, you do not use these ISPs.

But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them about
it every day, they will insist "no one told me".


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2005
steve wrote:
> news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
>
>
>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
>>at the freedom we had today....
>>

>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule
>
>
> TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here.
>
> If you want a free Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
>
> But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them about
> it every day, they will insist "no one told me".
>
>


Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge
engines needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot
and hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused
fibre, and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but
that gets them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, (
Intelligent either end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to
make more $. If this does not show up how not to let business do
business I dont now what will...

regards

Thing
PS Google is apparantly buying fibre, guess they can see this coming,
the lobbyists will spend millions in bribes to get what they want....so
google plans to go around them....using the huge pipe low cost
approach....it will succeed....
 
Reply With Quote
 
Kent Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2005

"thingy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> steve wrote:
>> news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
>>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
>>>at the freedom we had today....
>>>

>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule
>>
>>
>> TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a free
>> Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
>>
>> But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
>> about
>> it every day, they will insist "no one told me".

>
> Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
> they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
> need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
> priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge engines
> needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
> hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
> and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
> them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
> end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
> does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
> will...
>

Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
worry.


-KENT


 
Reply With Quote
 
Shane
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2005
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 10:41:53 +1300, Kent Smith wrote:

>
> "thingy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> steve wrote:
>>> news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
>>>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
>>>>at the freedom we had today....
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule
>>>
>>>
>>> TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a free
>>> Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
>>>
>>> But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
>>> about
>>> it every day, they will insist "no one told me".

>>
>> Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
>> they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
>> need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
>> priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge engines
>> needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
>> hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
>> and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
>> them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
>> end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
>> does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
>> will...
>>

> Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
> routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
> packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
> also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
> obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
> telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
> worry.
>
>
> -KENT


I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
common carrier status
(Something that has saved thier asses several times over)


--
Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.

 
Reply With Quote
 
news.xtra.co.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2005

"Shane" <(E-Mail Removed)-a-geek.net> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)-a-geek.net...
> On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 10:41:53 +1300, Kent Smith wrote:
>
>>
>> "thingy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> steve wrote:
>>>> news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
>>>>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be
>>>>>amazed
>>>>>at the freedom we had today....
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a
>>>> free
>>>> Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
>>>>
>>>> But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
>>>> about
>>>> it every day, they will insist "no one told me".
>>>
>>> Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
>>> they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
>>> need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
>>> priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge
>>> engines
>>> needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
>>> hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
>>> and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
>>> them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
>>> end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
>>> does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
>>> will...
>>>

>> Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
>> routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e
>> http
>> packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This
>> has
>> also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there
>> are
>> obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
>> telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit
>> of a
>> worry.
>>
>>
>> -KENT

>
> I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
> start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
> common carrier status
> (Something that has saved thier asses several times over)
>
>
> --
> Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked
>
> The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.
>


good point - imagine if the telcos are seeing kiddy porn and doing nothing
about it.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Matthew Poole
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2005
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 14:39:06 +1300, someone purporting to be
news.xtra.co.nz didst scrawl:

>
> "Shane" <(E-Mail Removed)-a-geek.net> wrote in message
> news(E-Mail Removed)-a-geek.net...

*SNIP*
>> I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
>> start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
>> common carrier status
>> (Something that has saved thier asses several times over)
>>

> good point - imagine if the telcos are seeing kiddy porn and doing nothing
> about it.


Not just kiddy porn. The feebs could start demanding that all e-mail
traffic be inspected to ensure that there are no breaches of CAN-SPAM. Or
extend Carnivore to the ISP level and have traffic streams sniffed for
particular words or phrases, and it would be very difficult (impossible)
for the ISPs to claim that they can't do that.

It's a bad move on so many levels. The idea must be a marketroid's, with
no (or ignored) input from legal. If it went through legal with no
negative comments, that's a lawyer or team of them that should be sued for
malpractice.

--
Matthew Poole
"Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."

 
Reply With Quote
 
thing2
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2005
Kent Smith wrote:
> "thingy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>steve wrote:
>>
>>>news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
>>>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
>>>>at the freedom we had today....
>>>>
>>>
>>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule
>>>
>>>
>>>TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a free
>>>Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
>>>
>>>But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
>>>about
>>>it every day, they will insist "no one told me".

>>
>>Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
>>they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
>>need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
>>priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge engines
>>needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
>>hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
>>and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
>>them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
>>end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
>>does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
>>will...
>>

>
> Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
> routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
> packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
> also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
> obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
> telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
> worry.
>
>
> -KENT
>
>


Stubs, yes, hence my intelligence at the edges comment. Here yes, we are
starting to talk major backbone, all these should be doing is policy
routeing as fast as possible....hence my post...

When they say makes high priority faster it is only a partial truth, the
rest really suffer, and if you are going to spend this much $ on engines
that do this then a better technical result is to just use more
pipes......so it is an obvious ripoff....

regards

thing







 
Reply With Quote
 
thing2
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2005
Matthew Poole wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 14:39:06 +1300, someone purporting to be
> news.xtra.co.nz didst scrawl:
>
>
>>"Shane" <(E-Mail Removed)-a-geek.net> wrote in message
>>news(E-Mail Removed)-a-geek.net...

>
> *SNIP*
>
>>>I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
>>>start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
>>>common carrier status
>>>(Something that has saved thier asses several times over)
>>>

>>
>>good point - imagine if the telcos are seeing kiddy porn and doing nothing
>>about it.

>
>
> Not just kiddy porn. The feebs could start demanding that all e-mail
> traffic be inspected to ensure that there are no breaches of CAN-SPAM. Or
> extend Carnivore to the ISP level and have traffic streams sniffed for
> particular words or phrases, and it would be very difficult (impossible)
> for the ISPs to claim that they can't do that.
>
> It's a bad move on so many levels. The idea must be a marketroid's, with
> no (or ignored) input from legal. If it went through legal with no
> negative comments, that's a lawyer or team of them that should be sued for
> malpractice.
>



sounds like the Sony debackle in the making yet again, greed has over
ridden common sense...........

I also have to wonder what the effect is globally on this, the world's
Internet does not end in the USA (well OK it just about does in terms of
traffic volume) but it does not have to stay taht way and the growing
third world wont need to route via the USA....I mean if your Korean, you
look by and large at korean webs sites, so who cares?

regards

Thing










 
Reply With Quote
 
Gordon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2005
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 10:41:53 +1300, Kent Smith wrote:

> Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
> routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
> packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
> also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
> obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
> telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
> worry.


Censorship?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Yankees sox game ends in a wild scene richard Computer Support 1 09-27-2010 04:46 PM
Those damn yankees! richard Computer Support 1 10-10-2009 02:25 PM
New releases: Blade: The Series, Pride Of The Yankees & Heartbreak Kid: Updated complete downloadable R1 DVD DB & info lists Doug MacLean DVD Video 0 12-11-2007 09:04 AM
When to destroy, when not to destroy Ook C++ 2 10-11-2005 02:11 AM
want to know who invented html? Nicole HTML 7 08-30-2005 10:55 PM



Advertisments