interesting snippets re: memes -- don't pay too much attention to
the rest of the article though (note it's from 1996)
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date forwarded: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 13:11:34 -0800 (PST)
Date sent: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 13:09:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Phil Agre <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: "net brownout" -- MEME 2.01
Forwarded by: [email protected]
Send reply to: [email protected]
[I'm going to start experimenting with labels on RRE messages. This one
is pretty obnoxious, I know. Feel free to remove it when forwarding the
message to other people or lists.]
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| The following message was sent through the Red Rock Eater News |
| Service (RRE). It can be forwarded electronically to anybody |
| for any non-commercial purpose. (Please do not use "redirect" |
| or "resend".) For information on RRE, including instructions |
| for how to subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message that looks |
| like this: |
| |
| To: [email protected] |
| Subject: help |
| |
| or consult the RRE web page at the following URL: |
| |
| http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/rre.html |
| |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 05:17:12 -0400
From: [email protected] (Forrest Richey)
To: Multiple recipients of list MEME <[email protected]>
Subject: 'net brownout [MEME 2.01]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
meme: (pron. 'meem') A contagious idea that replicates like a virus,
passed on from mind to mind. Memes function the same way genes and viruses
do, propagating through communication networks and face-to-face contact
between people. Derived from the word "memetics," a field of study which
postulates that the meme is the basic unit of cultural evolution. Examples
of memes include melodies, icons, fashion statements and phrases.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MEME 2.01
In this issue:
o Roto-Rooter for the Net: 1-800-DRAIN-ME
o Corrections (Simson Garfinkel corrects James Gosling)
o Announcements (I.D. Magazine 1996 Design Review, call for
submissions.)
This issue of MEME is dedicated to Bandwidth, Blockages, Brownouts -- a
close look at wether the Internet is teetering on the verge of collapse,
overstuffed by too much data.
"In the last three months, traffic to our site has doubled," Mark Kosters
tells me, "We have a root name-server at InterNIC, and the number of
queries is now at 230 to 250 queries per second." The site Kosters is
talking about lies at a major traffic center for the Internet -- Network
Solutions, in Virginia -- they're the people who decide who gets what
domain name (burgerking.com for instance, or bennahum.com), the closest
thing the Net has to a center.
Kosters is worried; from his vantage point, as principal investigator for
the InterNIC (http://rs.internic.net/), he must keep abreast of technical
problems fouling the world's largest computer network. Kosters claims that
the Net appears stretched to the breaking point, or perhaps, "shredding
point" is a better description: as you read this there's a better than
50-50 chance that somewhere a major switching point, or node, on the Net is
teetering on the verge of yet another brownout. "MAE-East," Kosters
explains, "has a problem with congestion. It goes down quite often, once
every couple of hours. Packets wind up getting dropped."
Translation: MAE-East (http://www.mfsdatanet.com:80/MAE/east.html) is one
of the major points where Internet traffic meets, gets re-routed, and then
sent off one step closer to its destination. Located near Washington D.C.,
MAE-East is a kind of barometer for the state-of-the-Net. Every time
MAE-East collapses under a tidal-wave of data, packets of information
simply disappear, swallowed into a black-hole of inadequate bandwidth. As
a user, the symptoms are subtle, often nothing more than an alert-box in
your Web browser telling you that the host is "unreachable." We often
assume that means a lot of other people are trying to access the same Web
page -- that's one explanation -- another is that you've just experienced a
temporary Internet brownout. Your packets just went down the drain.
When I first discovered this problem, I didn't really believe it. For
instance, this fall, you may have come across this story, or one similar to
it:
A major brownout on the Internet in mid-September was just a foretaste of
the online downtimes to come, say local experts. "I anticipate it
happening again," says Dan Benjamin, a local technology consultant. "It's
just a matter of time." The brownout resulted in many Internet users
unable to use the World Wide Web or other Internet services such as E-mail.
"It took down entire parts of the Internet -- it was severe," Benjamin
says. "Nobody was prepared for it to happen. The hardware in place simply
became too
overworked. There was too much traffic."
That little blurb ran November 24th, 1995, in the Orlando Business Journal,
a local Florida paper. Similar stories reared their heads in Inc.,
Internet Week, and Computergram International -- Internet brownout didn't
exactly make for front-page news, and I was skeptical anyway. The theme of
an overburdened Net returns from time to time to woo us with uncertainty,
and like the elemental "cry wolf" story, after awhile you just want to say,
"shut up." Conventional wisdom has it that the Net does not follow the
laws of physics, there is no limit to how big, fast and dense the Net can
become. Like Intel, with its magical semiconductors constantly doubling in
speed and halving in price, we assume the stuff that makes the Net -- you
know, cables and routers and switches -- the stuff 99% of us barely
understand -- also grows like silicon wafers. Well. Maybe they don't. In
fact, they definitely don't. And that spells T-R-O-U-B-L-E.
Culprits -- Sticky Webs.
When evaluating anyone's opinion, their background, or "provenance" (as the
French say), matters most. Only a handful of people in the world can look
at the Net from Kosters vantage point. So I called him expecting him to
refute these persistent rumors of Internet outages and brownouts. When he
confirmed the rumors were true, I asked for culprits. Kosters went on to
explain why the Net suffered from a bandwidth problem, beyond the obvious
"it's growing" explanation. Culprit number one: the World Wide Web.
"The Web has taken everything by storm," Kosters says, "but it is
inefficient." Here's the logic. When Tim Berners-Lee created the rules
governing how HTTP servers would serve up Web-pages, back in 1989, the
world of the Net was a nice cozy place -- a universe measured in the
thousands of people, sort of like a big bulletin-board service. Back then,
the Web that Berners-Lee envisioned didn't even have pictures, it was a
text-only universe. The GUI (Graphical User Interface) way of computing
was something for Macintosh users and computer scientists into graphics.
Berners-Lee wanted to create a way for fellow physicists to share research
papers, and yes, he did want a way for charts, tables and pictures to be
included in the paper, through the use of "hyperlinks." In the context of
this stable world, Berners-Lee had a choice, he could let a client-computer
read a Web page bit-by-bit, uploading chunks of information and making it
available to the human as it came in. Or he could have the client-computer
download the entire Web-document in one big fat gulp (sort of like FTP),
and *then* let the human see it. The latter is more efficient because the
client "calls" the server less often, reducing Internet traffic. The
former is better for the human -- you get to read the page as it is coming
in, bit by bit. In an era where computer science was (rightly) learning to
emphasize the human over the computer, Berners-Lee made the right choice,
favoring people.
Can't fault Berners-Lee for that. He never imagined Time Warner, for
instance, would create something called "Pathfinder," or that someone would
create "Real Audio" -- and let people listen to radio broadcasts and sounds
through web pages -- need I mention the fish-tank, coffee-maker,
soda-machine images beamed through the Web in real-time -- and that, oh
millions of people, would be doing this in 1996. As they say, "oops."
What's done is done. But that "inefficient" Web protocol did two things:
it attracted lots of people because it, as Berners-Lee hoped, sure was
"user-friendly;" it also clogged the drain big-time.
Culprit number two -- thin pipes.
So bandwidth is up. One solution, the obvious solution, is to make bigger
data-pipes. By and large that's been happening. Companies valiantly (or
rather profitably) come out with improvements all the time. Unfortunately
the growth of traffic on the Internet is on another order of magnitude from
the pipes. For now, the situation is getting worse, not better. Since
people's eyes tend to glaze over when the words "router", "node", "switch"
enter the conversation, I'll keep it short.
"Routing hasn't scaled very well," Kosters says. He goes on to name a
certain specific telephone company as being "on the bleeding edge," meaning
that its Internet data-handling business teeters on the brink of perpetual
breakdown, victim of poor engineering choices (can't say who, sorry, but
no, it is not MCI). "The biggest problem for everyone," according to
Kosters, "is the switches." The switches, those hardware devices that
control the flow of data, just can't do it fast enough. The switches,
which are part of the routers, mean the routers don't fare so well.
"Everybody uses Cisco (http://www.cisco.com/) as their core routers," says
Kosters, "there were software bugs that crashed the routers. That was a
major cause of outages. MCI had problems with their routers in Denver, and
that led to an outage between the East and West coast. Traffic increases
means Cisco can't make these bigger switches soon enough. We are near the
point of falling down, waiting for new technology to catch up."
Solutions -- Living in a sticky tub.
The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), another obscure Internet
governing body, is working on these problems
(http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us). They are responsible for setting the
standards for the Net, like how many numbers can be an Internet Protocol
(IP) address (mine is 198.7.7.184). They're examining what to do, which
includes examining the Web and seeing if there is some way to alter the way
HTTP servers send and receive data to make it more efficient; that alone
will make a big difference. Another proposed solution would meter Internet
usage, charging heavy users more, light users less, in the hope that the
magic hand of the market will put some logic into the system. Dream on.
Unless every Internet Service Provider (ISP) by unprecedented government
fiat everywhere in the world simultaneously agrees to do this it will not
work. All it takes in one mutineer to offer "unlimited Internet service"
for a flat-fee to destroy this idea -- and odds are a whole lot more than
one will do this (and even if they all agreed, the mathematical modeling of
this solution is so complex that predicting the weather seems easier to do;
we don't actually know for sure that traffic will go down this way). So
what's a plumber to do? Get used to a sticky tub?
Seriously, what's to be done?
There is no clear solution to the Internet bandwidth problem. There is one
comforting thought, however. Computer science has a long tradition of
countering the odds, of coming out with a solution which defies all
expectations. The pot of gold at the end of this problem is massive.
Expect a solution to arrive from somewhere, sometime this year, that will
once again redefine the limits of the Net and set the stage for 1997 (Any
readers out there with ideas? I'm willing to devote an issue of MEME to
them). In the meantime, learn to "multi-task" -- get things done while
waiting for your Web page to load. You can practice this by watching
television, reading and talking on the telephone at the same time. It
works.
MEME 1.09, the previous issue, had an interview with James Gosling, lead
architect behind Sun Microsystems' Java programming language. He said the
following, "I created the EMACS editor. I did the original one for Unix.
It is a text editor that has become really really popular on the Internet."
That it seems is open to debate. Simson Garfinkel, MIT alumnus, author of
several books on Internet security and encryption, and WIRED contributor,
responded:
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 10:02:25 -0500
To: [email protected]
From: [email protected] (Simson L. Garfinkel)
Subject: info on emacs
James Gosling should know better than to say that he "created the Emacs
editor". The first Emacs was written in 1975 by Richard Stallman. It was
an extensible editor, and users were asked to contribute improvements; the
whole package was shared as free software.
Emacs inspired over 30 imitations, including one written by Gosling in the
1980s. Gosling acknowledge this relationship at the time; his first manual
asked users to help improve the program to make it worthy of the name
"Emacs". Along with the name and much of the design, this idea of
cooperation also came from the original Emacs.
The users responded strongly to Gosling's appeal, contributing many
improvements. But Gosling did not follow this spirit himself; instead, he
turned the program into a commercial product. In response, Stallman
created GNU Emacs , a free program which has largely superseded Gosling's
version. GNU Emacs stays true to the spirit of mutual cooperation of the
original Emacs.
I ([email protected]) will be moderating I.D. (International Design)
Magazine 1996 Annual Design Review in Interactive Media, meaning I get to
sit around with three judges and write-up their evaluations of the best
examples of Interactive Media produced in 1995. Interactive Media means
anything that requires a computer to experience it (Web pages, CD-ROM,
software interface design, video games, etc., are all eligible.) What
follows is the official blurb from I.D. magazine asking for submissions.
Please forward it, repost it, to software designers, web designers, who
might be interested in submitting work. Thanks.
I.D. (International Design) Magazine 1996 Annual Design Review Deadline:
Feb. 1. Annual competition for design in the following categories:
Interactive Media, Consumer Products, Graphics, Furniture, Environments,
Packaging, Equipment, Concepts and Student Work. Projects designed or
introduced in North America and Europe in the 1995 calendar year will be
accepted.
Winning projects will be featured on a CD ROM and in a special double issue
of I.D. Magazine in July. For information and entry forms: Design Review
Editor, I.D. Magazine, 440 Park Avenue South, 14th Floor, New York, NY
10016, 212/447-1400 phone, 212/447-5231 fax, [email protected] e-mail.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The contents of Meme are (c) 1995 by David S. Bennahum. Pass on the Meme
anywhere you want, including other discussion lists, just be sure to keep
this signature file at the end.
Meme propagates bi-weekly. You can subscribe to Meme directly via email by
emailing [email protected] with a message that reads "subscribe
MEME firstname lastname" where firsname is replaced by your first name and
lastname by your last name (do not include the quote symbols.) Visit the
WWW home of Meme at Into the Matrix:
http://www.reach.com/matrix/
Send comments to [email protected]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
------- End of forwarded message -------
generated by msg2page 0.06 on Jul 21, 2006 at 19:04:44
search: