Tag Archive for 2013

France Gets a 400 Gbps Fiber Link

France Gets a 400 Gbps Fiber LinkDavid Meyer at GigaOm chronicles the latest jump in real-world networking. According to the article, Orange and Alcatel-Lucent (ALU) have lit a 400 Gbps fiber link across the French countryside. This link is the first working deployment of long-distance 400 Gbps wavelength fiber connectivity.

France Telecom- OrangeIn keeping with Bach Seat’s policy of covering real-world networking, GigaOm says this is the first field implementation. Struggling network gear maker Alcatel-Lucent and France Telecom-Orange (FTE) have deployed a long-distance terrestrial 400 Gbps optical fiber link that uses 44 such wavelengths to move an amazing (for now at least) 17.6 terabits per second (Tbps) of aggregate traffic.

GigaOM speculates moving this amount of traffic will be popular with telecoms operators. Telco networks are always facing a capacity crunch, mainly thanks to the explosion in the cloud and online video.

Alcatel-Lucent’sThe 275 miles (450km) link between Paris and Lyon, relies on Alcatel-Lucent’s 400 Gbps Photonic Service Engine. The article reports that the first tester is the French educational and research network Renater. The early use cases for this bump up from now-standard 100 Gbps wavelength technology will most likely be found in business and research, for services such as video on demand and telepresence that will make good use of the boosted bandwidth.

This link transports the bulk of France’s scientific data that passes through our network,” Renater MD Patrick Donath said in a statement. “This pilot phase also aims to test the latest switching equipment supplied by major OEMs on a network running at this capacity and will enable us the anticipate the architecture of Renater’s network in the coming years.”

A 400 Gbps network is an important step forward for the networks and research projects of tomorrow.

Related articles
  • Submarine Capacity Quadruples (dailywireless.org)

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

What is 4G Mobile Wireless

What is 4G Mobile WirelessWireless operators continue to roll out mobile networks built with acronym-heavy standards such as 4G, Long Term Evolution (LTE), IEEE 802.16 (WiMAX), or HSPA+. Stacey Higginbotham at GigaOM says it’s hardly a surprise that every press release is touting 4G, which presumably stands for the fourth generation wireless network. Only, according to InfoWorld, the truth is, neither WiMax nor LTE qualify as 4G technologies, according to the International Telecommunications Union Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R). For a service to be called 4G by the ITU-R carriers will have to use one of two future mobile wireless technologies.

GigaOM reports that in October 2009, the ITU fielded 6 candidates that could meet the true definition of 4G mobile wireless. The main criteria required speed boosts, but more importantly, new technologies that make more efficient use of spectrum, as well as an ability to work with other radio access systems and fixed wireline networks. The standard also requires that equipment makers offer features that will help guarantee the quality of service on wireless networks. Of the 6 candidates, the ITU declared the upcoming called LTE-Advanced and WirelessMAN-Advanced – also known as IEEE 802.16m the only true 4G mobile wireless technologies.

True 4G wireless calls for peak speeds of 100 Mbps for mobile applications and 1 Gigabit per second for fixed networks. To do such speeds, operators will need five to ten times as much spectrum as most are using now to deploy LTE, as well as complex antenna configurations. The new 8×8 MIMO will need some new antennas at the tower and inside the mobile devices. Some operators won’t ever get to that point. Others might, but it’s going to take four or five years before people start rolling out anything like the ITU’s version of 4G mobile wireless according to the GigaOm article.

IEEE logoThe faux 4G we are getting now, comes in three flavors thanks to a bold marketing effort by T-Mobile writes Ms. Higginbotham. T-Mobile’s HSPA+ network is most assuredly 3G (or maybe 3.5G for some) but as its CTO, Neville Ray, argued with GigaOM founder Om Malik, its real-world mobile wireless speeds are better than those offered by WiMAX and are comparable to the real-world expectations of Verizon’s LTE network. The key to T-Mo’s experience lies in its spectrum resources. As a general rule, the more spectrum an operator has, the more lanes in its highway it can cram bits into. The blog says T-Mobile can use that spectrum to increase capacity or increase speeds. With plans to move from 21 Mbps to 42 Mbps speeds using HSPA+, T-Mo is going for speed to keep up with the wireless mobile Jones.

Laptop reports that other mobile wireless operators do not qualify as 4G either. “… Sprint and Clearwire’s Mobile WiMax (3 to 6 Mbps), T-Mobile’s HSPA+ (5 to 8 Mbps), and even Verizon Wireless’ LTE network (5 to 12 Mbps) don’t even come close to deserving the 4G moniker.

After all, marketers pushing LTE first starting waving the 4G mobile wireless flag several years ago, despite the ITU hadn’t yet decided if LTE was 4G. The first releases weren’t. We’ll have to wait for LTE-Advanced in about four or five years for true 4G. By then, it’s possible we’ll be dealing with 5G mobile wireless networks or something even better the marketers dream up. In the meantime, consumers will buy their faux 4G mobile wireless phones for their faux 4G mobile wireless networks and never sweat the difference GigaOm speculates.

The faux 4G networks are incremental improvements over 3G. As Tolaga Research analyst Phil Marshall told InfoWorld, these wireless mobile networks were designed from day 1 for data, and are all Internet protocol (IP) from end to end. That’s a huge improvement over 3G and it’s a marked change. Despite the improved architecture, Wi-Fi Net News asks if the spectrum is available to meet the 2015 rollout for real 4G. “It looks like the maximum speeds being discussed require extremely wide channels, like 100 MHz. That’s not impossible, but no U.S. carrier has 100 MHz in a chunk that it materializes. The FCC white-spaces rulemaking frees up a bunch of 6 MHz pieces, and that’s the last major realignment after DTV 700 MHz spectrum that I’m aware of. The definition of 4G may now be set, but the ability to roll out 4G at anything like the minimum speeds promised seems highly problematic even in five years.”

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Mobile Patent Troll Sues Everyone

Mobile Patent Troll Sues EveryoneSurprise, surprise there’s another mobile-related patent lawsuit. at GigaOM says this time the plaintiff is an obscure Delaware-registered limited liability non-practicing entity called Steelhead. The patent in question covers ‘mobile radio handover initiation determination’ – in other words, choosing which cellular base station has the best signal as the handset moves from one place to another.

Cell phonesThe defendants are a who’s who of the mobile world: Apple (AAPL), AT&T (T), Google (GOOG), HTCKyocera (KYO), LG (LGLD), MetroPCS (PCS), Motorola Mobility, NEC Corporation (6701), Pantech, Research In Motion (RIMM), Sony (SNE), Sprint (S), T-Mobile, Verizon (VZ) and ZTE (763). The article says these firms committed the mortal sin of allowing their mobile phones to act like mobile phones. But the interesting thing about this particular suit is the origin of the suit – or, more precisely, the reporting around that origin.

Mr. Meyer reports that U.S. Patent No. 5,491,834 comes from BT (BT). It was filed in 1993 and granted in 1996. The patent is still listed by the USPTO as belonging to BT. In its court filings provided by the author, (the Motorola/Google example is here), Steelhead notes that it “owns all rights of recovery under the ‘834 Patent, including the exclusive right to recover for past infringement.

aggressively monetizingThe author suggests that this case may not be BT “aggressively monetizing” its patent portfolio. BT told Mr. Meyer, “BT sold all of its rights to the patents last year. We have no involvement in Steelhead Licensing LLC’s litigation activity.

BT claims the troll is not a shell front for the firm. A spokesperson for the telecom giant told GigaOM,  “BT doesn’t share in Steelhead’s licensing income”.

rb-

I have covered the mobile patent wars many times here. I don’t know why I find patent trolling so interesting to follow. Maybe it is the same reason I watch NASCAR highlights, for the crashes, or the buy a few Powerball tickets, just in case.

Maybe someday all the money spent on lawyers will actually go back to making things and creating jobs.

Kids squabblingShame on BT if this is a legit patent and they were not smart enough to enforce their claim when they had it. I’m no lawyer, it seems to me that mobiles that can’t find a cell tower to connect to don’t work.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Chinas Internet Giants are Massive

Chinas Internet Giants are MassiveDerrick Harris, writer for GigaOM recently gave us a peek inside China’s Internet giants and their massive scale. The author describes China’s big four internet companies as huge, but not technological innovators like their American counterparts – yet.

China’s Internet market

Great China FirewallThe Chinese Internet market is very, very big despite the Great Firewall that cuts Chinese citizens off from many popular U.S. web services. The article states there are more Chinese netizens than all the citizens of the United States and European Union combined. And they use social media and e-commerce just like the rest of us. The author gives some examples of the scale of the companies providing social media, e-commerce, and information-discovery needs to China’s 1.3 billion people.

TaobaoAlibaba Group

Taobao, the eBay-like e-commerce line of business from Chinese internet giant Alibaba Group, does a lot of business. On a single day — Nov. 11, 2011 — the company did a whopping 19 billion yuan (about $3.05 billion) in sales. According to Alibaba Group CTO and Alibaba Cloud Computing President Wang Jian, the company site surpassed the 1 trillion yuan (about $160 billion) mark for 2012 revenue at the end of November. Alipay, the company’s version of PayPal, handles about 3 billion yuan (about $480 million) in transactions every day.

AlibabaBy comparison, eBay (EBAY) posted $3.4 billion in revenue for the entire third quarter this year. Amazon (AMZN), with which Taobao also competes (although Alibaba also has a business-to-consumer division called Tmall), closed its third quarter with $13.8 billion in revenue. Of course, Taobao and Alipay are just two of Alibaba’s expansive portfolio of services, which includes a troubled partnership with Yahoo (YHOO).

That type of business means Alibaba needs a lot of servers. In a single year not too long ago, Jian told the author, the company bought more servers than it had in the previous five years combined. If you charted Alibaba’s server count now versus five years ago, he added, the previous number would look like zero. How big is its database? Enough to store data for more than 800 million items for sale.

Baidu

Baidu logoThe Chinese search giant is ranked fifth in the Alexa internet rankings, which is evidence of its popularity. All those users, I’m told, result in an annual server growth about equal to the previous three years combined. It is reported that Baidu (BIDU) is planning possibly the world’s largest data center — spanning 120,000 square meters, costing $1.6 billion, housing 100,000 servers (totaling 700,000 CPUs and 3 million cores), and storing 4,000 petabytes of data.

Tencent logoTencent

Sometimes compared with Facebook (FB), Tencent (TCEHY) boasted more than 717 million users for its popular QQ messaging service as of September 2011. That number has surely grown. The company says its highest-ever number of concurrent users was more than 176 million, although there are often tens of millions (if not more than 100 million people) using it at any given time. An individual with some knowledge of the company’s infrastructure told me Tencent adds about 100,000 servers per year.

Weibo

Weibo logoThe Twitter-like platform from internet new-school internet company Sina had more than 400 million users as of April 2012. That’s about twice the number Twitter claims. And the Chinese use Weibo a lot, for everything from micro-blogging to self-publishing. It might actually be a more important tool in China than Twitter is in the United States, sources told the author, because while the government can censor official news outlets, it can’t possibly control the stream of information coming off Weibo. And that will mean even more growth.

Mr. Harris concludes that, despite their sheer scale, Chinese internet companies are, by most accounts, less technologically inclined than their American counterparts. The biggest reason, the author says is that these companies tend to view themselves as traditional businesses and not technology companies. Another factor mentioned is that employees often strive to work up the management ladder not remain career engineers. This inevitably affects R&D budgets, makes companies less willing to take risks, and reduces the pool of employees that really, deeply understand complex systems.

10,000 webscale serversThe blog cites the server situation within China’s big four internet companies. Alibaba’s Jian told the author that although his company is running all white boxes in its data centers now, it had a lot of legacy IBM (IBM) gear in its data centers five years ago. The same thing is reported about Baidu. Tencent, had 10,000 webscale servers fail in six months last year and is considering a move back to traditional boxes.

Open Compute Project

The article speculates that these companies are coming around on innovation beyond just buying more efficient gear. Tencent, Baidu, and Alibaba, for example, are all members of the Facebook-led Open Compute Project for designing webscale hardware. Tencent and Baidu actually created their own rack-design specification, called Project Scorpio, which is being merged into Open Compute’s Open Rack design in 2013. They still don’t build their own servers like Google and Facebook do, preferring instead to push their custom specs on server makers, but many innovative American companies, including eBay, do the same thing.

Open ComputeFacebook VP Frank Frankovsky told PCWorld, “We compete with those guys, but on the infrastructure side, if we can make our infrastructure more efficient, it makes everyone that much better. Where we differentiate our business is in the service we provide to our end users.

That differentiation comes in large part from an incredible investment in research and technology. If they want to be considered thought leaders in their field — and if they want to expand significantly into cloud computing (as Alibaba and Sina clearly want to do) — China’s internet companies will have to start matching their immense scale with demonstrated technology.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Tablet Info

Outside the office, workers turn to the tablet over the PC

Outside the office, workers turn to the tablet over the PCTablet computing is not overtaking smartphones or PCs in the enterprise, but they’re definitely carving a new business niche for themselves a survey conducted by cloud content management firm Alfresco shows. According to the data cited by GigaOM, tablets have replaced the PC as the go-to workstation for working at home and on the road.

The Alfresco study found that staff is using tablets:

  • 48% of enterprise employees are using tablets after hours at home,
  • 55% of respondents use tablets at business meetings (vs. 24% using PCs),
  • 50% are turning first to slates at conferences, compared to 13% using their laptops.

Alfresco reported that employees prefer the smartphone at more informal business functions

  • 57% using them at business lunches and
  • 51% using them in coffee shops.

But the tablet is also starting to become commonplace even in those more casual settings: 34% of respondents said they would haul out their slate at a lunch meeting, while 43% would do the same in a coffee shop.

The Alfresco data indicates that the 3-screen reality is coming true. Tablets aren’t replacing either smartphones or laptops, but are instead creating a new space in-between. The vendor says it’s pretty clear that laptops are increasingly tethered to the desk or cube, while tablets are the tool of choice on the go.

RB- This has huge implications on the support side of the equations

Incorporating Tablets into Enterprise Security

Incorporating Mobile Devices into Enterprise SecurityEnterprise information security hasn’t caught up with the consumerization of IT according to Lenny Zeltser in a recent article on the Lenny Zeltser on Information Security blog. The author states that the urgency with which organizations need to account for consumerization is driven by modern mobile devices such as Apple iPhones and iPads.

Enterprises are coming to terms with the idea of employees connecting to the corporate network over a VPN. Be it from personal laptops and home workstations according to the article. However, most organizations haven’t looked at the effect that the proliferation of powerful mobile devices has on enterprise security architecture.

Mobile devices sometimes have VPN-like access to the corporate network. In most cases have access to the company’s email contents, calendar, and address book. The devices are as powerful as laptops were just a few years ago. Yet, their operating system’s security has not benefited from the test of time. Tablets and mobile devices lack most of the security controls we’d expect to find in a “legacy” workstation OS.

Mr. Zeltser argues we need to understand how to model the threat vectors related to mobile devices and how to adjust the security of the enterprise architecture accordingly. The measures will probably involve:

  • Greater segmentation of the company’s network,
  • Treating any device that users interact with, whether it’s a desktop or a mobile phone, as an untrusted node,
  • Standards and tools to lock down the configuration of mobile devices,
  • Practices and technologies for managing vulnerabilities in applications and the OS of mobile devices,
  • Incident response plans that incorporate both “legacy” IT infrastructure assets and mobile devices.

BYO tablet? Three ways business is getting it all wrong

BYO tech? Three ways business is getting it all wrongSilicon.com had an article describing Three ways businesses are getting BYOD all wrong. The author claims the days of the standard work-issued laptop are numbered as businesses let staff use their own computers and gadgets in the workplace.

However, in the rush to adopt bring-your-own tech, businesses are placing too many restrictions on how personal devices can be used at work according to Anthony Vigneron, collaboration services global manager at global law firm Clifford Chance. He estimates that about 10 percent of firms’ 7,000 staff share the same device at home and work.

Mr. Vigneron described for silicon.com three ways businesses get it wrong when it comes to letting staff use personal devices at work.

Use sandboxing

Businesses are often advised to provide personal devices with secure access to corporate systems using sandboxed virtual machines. Sand-boxed machines allow remote access to corporate info via a virtual desktop that is run from the business’ data center.

He says it is better to let users access corporate data and apps from their device’s own OS. “Trying to deliver applications within a sandbox is not what users want. That’s not consumerization, that’s just another way of providing the same apps on different hardware,” he said.

People want to use the native applications. They don’t want to have to log in through some other system.” He concludes “The business should be able to control some of the applications staff use but you don’t want all those things inside another application.

Give them a choice

Mr. Vigneron argues that the line where work life ends and private life begins is becoming increasingly blurred. So it doesn’t make sense to treat them as two separate entities. By not allowing workers to merge their work and home calendars, contacts, and emails, businesses are imposing an artificial distinction on their staff. He explains, “You do want some separation … People want the choice of being able to work with the same interface.

Costs matter

Letting staff use their personal smartphone while working may seem like a good idea. However, employees might be in for an unpleasant shock when they get their phone bill. Mr. Vigneron said “For companies to allow for consumerization, the price has to get to an equivalent of what we can get as a corporate. They’re not doing that at the moment.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.