[Bloat] viability of the data center in the internet of the future

[Dave Taht]

I didn't care for my name in the subject line in the first place,
although it did inspire me to do some creative venting elsewhere, and
now here. And this is still way off topic for the bloat list...

One of the points in the wired article that kicked this thread off was
this picture of what the internet is starting to look like:

http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/net_neutral.jpg.jpeg

I don't want it to look like that. I worked pretty hard to defuse the
"fast vs slow" lane debate re peering because it was so inaccurate,
and it does look like it has died down somewhat, but
that doesn't mean I like the concentration of services that is going on.

I want the "backbone" to extend all the way to the edge.

I want the edge to be all connected together, so in the unlikely event
comcast goes out of business tomorrow, I can get re-routed 1 hop out
from my house through verizon, or joe's mom and pop fiber shop, or
wherever. I want a network that can survive multiple backhoe events,
katrinas, and nuclear wars, all at the same time. I'd like to be able
to get my own email,
and do my own phone and videoconferencing calls with nobody in the
middle, not even for call setup, and be able to host my own my own
services on my own hardware, with some level of hope that anything
secret or proprietary stays within my premise. I want a static ip
address range, and
control over my own dns.

I don't mind at all sharing some storage for the inevitable
advertising if the cdn's co-located inside my business are also
caching useful bits of javascript, etc, just so I can save on latency
on wiping the resulting cruft from my eyeballs. I want useful
applications, running, directly, on my own devices, with a minimum
amount of connectivity to the outside world required to run them. I
want the 83 items in my netflix queue already downloaded, overnight,
so I can pick and choose what to see without ever having a "Buffering"
event. I want my own copy of wikipedia, and a search engine that
doesn't share everything you are looking for with the universe.

I want the legal protections, well established for things inside your
home, that are clearly not established in data centers.

I'd like it if the software we had was robust, reliable, and secure
enough to do that. I'd like it if it were easy to make offsite
backups, as well as mirror services with friends and co-authors.

And I'd like my servers to run on a couple watts, at most, and not
require special heating, or cooling.

And I'd like (another) beer and some popcorn. Tonight's movie:

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/VJKvfvKU9pi

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:28 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:06 PM, David P. Reed <dpreed at reed.com> wrote:
>> Maybe I am misunderstanding something... it just took my Mac book Pro doing
>> an rsync to copy a TB of data from a small NAS  at work yesterday to get
>> about 700 Gb/sec on a GigE office network for hours yesterday.
>>
>> I had to do that in our Santana Clara office rather than from home outside
>> Boston, which is where I work 90% of the time.
>>
>> That's one little computer and one user...
>
> On a daily basis, the bufferbloat websites transfer far, far less than gigE
>
> IF the redmine portion of the site wasn't so cpu expensive, I could
> use something
> other than hefty boxes they are on. Similarly snapon's cpu is mostly
> used for builds, the file transfer role could be done by something else
> easily. I'd like to switch it over to do that one day.
>
>> What does my Mac Book Pro draw doing that? 80 Watts?
>
> I love the "kill-a-watt" products. I use them everywhere. (while I'm
> pimping stuff I like, digilogger's power switches are a lifesaver also -
> staging boots for devices that draw a lot of power in a tiny lab that
> can only draw 350 watts before becoming a fire hazard)
>
> Your NAS probably ate less than 16 watts, more if you have more than one drive.
>
> My nucs draw 18 watts and can transfer at GigE off a flash disk
> without raising a sweat.
> (at least some of your overhead is in the rsync protocol, which is
> overly chatty)
>
> Several tiny arm boards can all do gigE at line rate, notably stuff built around
> marvell and cavium's chipset(s), and they do it at under 2 watts. Most support
> 64GB mini-sd cards (with pretty lousy transfer rates).
>
> Pretty sure (haven't booted it yet) the parallella (which is smaller
> than a drive),
> can do it in under a 2 watt, and if it doesn't do gigE now, it'll do
> it after I get through
> with it - but it lacks a sata port, and usb is only 2.0, so it might
> not drive gigE
> from a nas perspective. (It kind of bugs me that most of the tiny boards are in
> the altoids form factor, rather than the 2.5 inch drive form factor)
>
> So I go back to my original point in that, once you have fiber to the business,
> for most purposes in a small business or startup or home - who needs
> to co-lo in a data center?
> You can have a tiny wart on the wall do most of the job. And that's
> today. In another
> year or so we'll be over some more tipping points.
>
> One thing that does bug me is most UPSes are optimized to deliver a large
> load over a short time, a UPS capable of driving 5 watts for, say, 3 days is
> kind of rare.
>
>> On Jun 27, 2014, David Lang wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Michael Richardson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rick Jones wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps, but where does having gigabit fibre to a business imply the
>>>>> business
>>>>> has the space, power, and cooling to host all the servers it might
>>>>> need/wish
>>>>> to have?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's a secondary decision.
>>>> Given roof space, solar panels and/or snow-outside, maybe the answer is
>>>> that
>>>> I regularly have 2 our of 3 of those available in a decentralized way.
>>>
>>>
>>> given the amount of processing capacity that you can get today in a
>>> pasively
>>> cooled system, you can do quite a b it of serving from a small amount of
>>> space
>>> and power.
>>>
>>> The days when it took rooms of Sun boxes to saturate a Gb line are long
>>> gone,
>>> you can do that with just a handful of machines.
>>>
>>> David Lang
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>
>>
>> -- Sent from my Android device with K-@ Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bloat mailing list
>> Bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Täht
>
> NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article



-- 
Dave Täht

NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article