Posts
This is more a mindless free flowing rant than anything real, as I have posted nothing for a while, I wanted to make a post, but my recent situation with a series of ailing computers and ISP issues I have not had the luxury to post. At least it may give you some clues of what I have been up to lately. I admit it's a little scattered and perhaps wacky, but if you do not like it there is always the address bar on your web browser. I think if you make it to the end, it comes full circle.
“Free is a very good Price” is what my old buddy Tom would have said, along with “It's worth the trip, or “The happy place to buy”. Tom would advertise on late night television and was always trying to sell TVs, Stereos and furniture. Often times he had a gift with the purchase, or would make burgers in the parking lot, thus the "Free is a very good price". Many of the TVs he once sold were like pieces of furniture. You expected to get several years out of it. Some had nice hardwood cabinets, and if they needed repair, a guy came to you and fixed it, while you suffered looking at his crack hanging out the back of his pants. If this guy goes around with his crack hanging out is he really smart enough to fix my TV? Well he most always did! Later Tom's TVs went to more portable packages and later more disposable. The era of in home TV repair died, as the era for the home TV repairman, but we will not miss the crack. It became cheaper to replace than to repair. More on this later...
Over the last several months I have been using quite a mix of PC, Mac, and Linux. As if that were not enough within those three OSes, I have used at least two different versions of each of those in the last few months. Each OS has its ups and downs , but I am very much leaning towards Ubuntu Linux as the clear winner, especially on the x86 architecture! Second on my Linux list I would have to say is CentOS5 I guess that is the geek in me talking. I also place Windows far above the Mac, mostly for free tools downloads on the PC, whereas the Mac I must pay for the software. I found the Mac OS to be more and more Linux Like the more I got into it though.
So how have I survived this flurry of operating systems and computers the last several months?
OpenOffice offers file compatibility with Microsoft Office, and is available for every major operating system, such as Windows, Mac, and Linux. So now not only is it free, I remember not long ago, when we had trouble reading a Mac floppy on a PC to transfer files and nowadays you can have Open office on all of the aforementioned and more.
Now look at the networks, and look how far we have come from Arcnet, and localtalk to the more common networks attained today which include WiFi, power-line, and home phone line networking. Not to mention that the systems and software allow us to seamlessly communicate across platforms, and architectures. Most of my files are saved to a NAS or a thumb drive these days. My computer can totally crash tomorrow and I have my data on the NAS ready for whatever Operating System I plug in!
Oh and that is if you can not deal with the complexities of using a memory stick! Today, we carry around 8 Gig thumb drives. I remember my first hard disk was 20 Meg full height 5 and 1/4 inch hard disk drive, and I was so sad that I could not afford the sleeker sexier half height 40 Meg hard disk!
While mentioning thumb drives and NAS devices I will take a minute to mention portable applications for Windows. They are great to continue working with all of the same programs when you change from one windows computer to another. These applications contain all the necessary support files in the application folder. No installation required.
So where is all of this going? I was hoping someone could tell me that! I remember only a few years ago I wanted that new wingding for my computer. Whatever it was, today I see them on ebay for a fraction of the original selling price. Next year someone will clean it out of their closet, because it operates at a fraction of the speed of the newer models, or the interface was phased out. I mean why use a 5 ¼ inch 20 Meg Hard Disk when you could use an 8 Gig thumb drive? What do I do with it?
It is all going right in the dumpster!
So I take a moment to ask all consumers across the globe to go green. All of this stuff we are throwing away contaminates the environment by leaving plastics and lead and more around. Consumers drive most markets, so where there is demand it will be filled. I mean we all wanted the Star Trek Communicator apparently and then we got the Motorola StarTac. Today, nobody wants one of those old Motorola StarTacs! What will it be next year? When will it end? Who will clean up the mess of the earth that this technological revolution is causing? The manufacturers and retailers need to start accepting more social responsibility to mother earth. Consumers should realize too that going green is more than taking your own bag to Wal Mart. Also, that we should activate against the disposable society that we have created and avoid messy toxic waste for our children. We must create a greener consumer demand in the marketplace and frown on disposable consumer products, and shun the disposable products. Do I care if my print server is only 10Mb/s or MUST I upgrade it to Gigabit Ethernet? With the technology today why is it not entirely firmware upgradeable?
MAN I GOTTA THROW AWAY ALL THESE DEAD COMPUTERS!
Nov 13, 2009
Jul 1, 2009
How much is too much, Wifi, Bluetooth, wireless video and more
I often see that people are very quick to add new wireless components such as WiFi and Bluetooth components to their existing systems.
I think that most users are unaware of the dangers in using such devices and perhaps should adopt an attitude of "less is better". If you look at the average modern home you may find WiFi, Bluetooth, wireless video, cordless phones, and more, and when someone wants a new component they always look to those that support wireless. Although it may sound sexy and keep you free of wire clutter, one of the most important considerations is your family's health. With every new wireless component you increase the Electromagnetic radiation in your home. With that increase you increase the probability that it will affect your health.
I do not want a cell phone with a bluetooth headset on my body. The effects of the cell phone alone are dangerous. Now with that add the radiation of the bluetooth and you have a new risk.
In your home network you may think that that new wireless NAS is sexy, but did you know that that NAS can be anywhere on your network including, a wired segment , and still pass the contents of that NAS over EXISTING wireless infrastructure, such as your router? You need not use a wireless NAS.
I have been asked by some as to adding such components, who do not clearly understand this and "think wireless" for all components. The physical location of a NAS probably has little importance, so why do you need wireless? Aside from that you will most probably get far better performance from wired components.
next time think about how that new wireless gadget may have on your health or longevity. keep in M ind that the manufacturers have little regard for your health, nor dpoes the salesman that will try to up-sell you to that costlier wireless model, even though it may offer zero benefit in your installation in the end.
In my opinion I do not want my computers emanating WiFi and bluetooth RF radiation as I sit by my cell phone that also emanates electromagnetic radiation. I am not talking about just for you, as perhaps you have small children in your home, who may be even more gravely affec ted by sjuch RF energey.
I think that most users are unaware of the dangers in using such devices and perhaps should adopt an attitude of "less is better". If you look at the average modern home you may find WiFi, Bluetooth, wireless video, cordless phones, and more, and when someone wants a new component they always look to those that support wireless. Although it may sound sexy and keep you free of wire clutter, one of the most important considerations is your family's health. With every new wireless component you increase the Electromagnetic radiation in your home. With that increase you increase the probability that it will affect your health.
I do not want a cell phone with a bluetooth headset on my body. The effects of the cell phone alone are dangerous. Now with that add the radiation of the bluetooth and you have a new risk.
In your home network you may think that that new wireless NAS is sexy, but did you know that that NAS can be anywhere on your network including, a wired segment , and still pass the contents of that NAS over EXISTING wireless infrastructure, such as your router? You need not use a wireless NAS.
I have been asked by some as to adding such components, who do not clearly understand this and "think wireless" for all components. The physical location of a NAS probably has little importance, so why do you need wireless? Aside from that you will most probably get far better performance from wired components.
next time think about how that new wireless gadget may have on your health or longevity. keep in M ind that the manufacturers have little regard for your health, nor dpoes the salesman that will try to up-sell you to that costlier wireless model, even though it may offer zero benefit in your installation in the end.
In my opinion I do not want my computers emanating WiFi and bluetooth RF radiation as I sit by my cell phone that also emanates electromagnetic radiation. I am not talking about just for you, as perhaps you have small children in your home, who may be even more gravely affec ted by sjuch RF energey.
Feb 12, 2009
The Bleeding Edge
As time goes on, I come to realize more and more, that I always seem to look for solutions on the bleeding edge.
I am currently looking for the following solutions that do not seem to yet exist!
I am currently looking for the following solutions that do not seem to yet exist!
- A USB device that allows me to take a Single USB drive and share it with the USB ports on two computers. I am NOT looking to network the machines, over USB or otherwise. It seems re4asonable that in this day and age such a solution would already exist, but it does not. Why would I want this? Well Imagine a USB drive connected simultaneously to your computer and to the USB port of a DIVX compatible DVD player. As you write a file from the computer, you may stream audio to your stero from the same USB hard drive. Alternately you may connect to a USB network device such as the Linksys SLUG , while connected to your DVD player.This may also be incorporated to a USB hard disk case to allow simultaneous access from two host controllers. This may be easier if one device is tagged as "read only" as in the case of the DIVX compatible DVD.
- A "Smart" USB to Ethernet adapter. What this Ethernet adapter does is emulates a hard disk from a Windows or NFS network. It is reasonable that it would need some kind of a programming interface such as a mini web server to configure network parameters; Workgroup and shares to connect to, or perhaps with a utility through the USB port. This would also be useful on one of those DIVX compatible DVD players to stream DIVX video to your TV or MP3s to your stereo system via a DVD players USB port (which works only with a USB Disk)
- Accessible HDTV modulator / Encoder. I mean a simple device that can take a HDMI or similar signal and produce a HD modulated "TV Channel" that can be used with the built in tuner on an HD TV. Ideally this would allow several to be used on different channels. There are many CCTV systems that will be undergoing upgrades in the years to come.
Feb 7, 2009
Fun with DIVX and XVID, and torrents
I am a big fan of DIVX , in fact I paid for the full DIVX encoder. About a year ago, I acquired some Hard Disk Media Players that I just love. They play back DIVX files, and XVID as it is a clone of DIVX. These devices have allowed me to keep my original DVDs stored away, where they do not get touched. With DIVX, I can compress the videos down to a reasonable size and maintain video quality. My dabbling with this and other devices has led me to this Post.
Lately I have downloaded some TV series and movies and I see the same issues arise. (See my feelings on legality below).
Frame Rates and Program Length
Consistently, I see that programs that should be about 44 minutes in length with commercials cut out, often play back at 40 minutes in length. I pondered this problem a lot, and as a former television technician, I reasonably sure that 44 minutes or so constitutes 1 hour with commercial breaks.
Here is what I finally concluded.... There is a process called 3/2 pull down, where a 24 FPS film is converted to roughly 30 FPS (by inserting an occasional "extra" frame) when transferred to video in North America (NTSC). There is a similar process used in PAL however I have not done all the math exactly, but I did do enough math to identify the problem. Some software, or the users of software, are removing these extra frames. This is not unusual and is a good idea to reduce file size. The problem lies in that the file still is playing back at 25 FPS, not the 24 that it should play back at. Most of these files originated from PAL systems I can tell due to the PAL video sizes. The most annoying part of this problem is that sometimes it is noticeable that the dialog, and motion, on such ripped programs seems hurried. I remember the advent and discussions of a device called the Lexicon in the 80s which performed a similar function for broadcasters and allowed them to pack more commercials in a 1 hour program. I can not emphasize to all of you DVD rippers enough that you need to keep the proper frame rate, which should reflect whether the pulldown was removed or not. If so, the resulting video is 24 FPS , not 25 FPS, and definitely not 30 FPS, as this affects the playback duration and presents the content in a hurried format.
Aspect Ratio and Cropping
I know there are given aspect ratio "standards" but I have seen some home rippers making some serious mistakes. I do not worry about "proper" resolutions so much, as long as the aspect is correct. I recently downloaded some files for testing via torrents. Now in the case of one film in particular , every copy I found had the same butchering to it when it came to aspect ratio. That file which you can find easily is the 1994 film "The Little Rascals" . It was butchered because when downloaded from a torrent, it is in a 16x9 aspect ratio. Hhowever, the DVD that it was ripped from apparently was 4x3, so it was cropped when ripped. The bad part about that is that it was already cropped when presented in 4x3 and cropping it again yields only a fraction of the original frame. When I downloaded and viewed this file it looked very odd to me, although the quality was good tops of heads were frequently cut off, so I connected the old VHS and started comparing my old 4x3 aspect VHS tape of this movie with the downloaded 16x9 version. I should see more on the sides of the 16x9 from , however in this case I see less of the top and bottom. Clearly that file on the torrents (700.18 Meg) was from a 4x3 aspect DVD then cropped to 16x9. This is a horrible mistake for anyone ripping DVDs!
Comments about my downloads
I want to clarify that my downloads were for testing purposes, and all downloads were of movies that I already own original media. Since I do own original media, I do not feel that I am infringing on copyrights by downloading a back - up copy.
Lately I have downloaded some TV series and movies and I see the same issues arise. (See my feelings on legality below).
Frame Rates and Program Length
Consistently, I see that programs that should be about 44 minutes in length with commercials cut out, often play back at 40 minutes in length. I pondered this problem a lot, and as a former television technician, I reasonably sure that 44 minutes or so constitutes 1 hour with commercial breaks.
Here is what I finally concluded.... There is a process called 3/2 pull down, where a 24 FPS film is converted to roughly 30 FPS (by inserting an occasional "extra" frame) when transferred to video in North America (NTSC). There is a similar process used in PAL however I have not done all the math exactly, but I did do enough math to identify the problem. Some software, or the users of software, are removing these extra frames. This is not unusual and is a good idea to reduce file size. The problem lies in that the file still is playing back at 25 FPS, not the 24 that it should play back at. Most of these files originated from PAL systems I can tell due to the PAL video sizes. The most annoying part of this problem is that sometimes it is noticeable that the dialog, and motion, on such ripped programs seems hurried. I remember the advent and discussions of a device called the Lexicon in the 80s which performed a similar function for broadcasters and allowed them to pack more commercials in a 1 hour program. I can not emphasize to all of you DVD rippers enough that you need to keep the proper frame rate, which should reflect whether the pulldown was removed or not. If so, the resulting video is 24 FPS , not 25 FPS, and definitely not 30 FPS, as this affects the playback duration and presents the content in a hurried format.
Aspect Ratio and Cropping
I know there are given aspect ratio "standards" but I have seen some home rippers making some serious mistakes. I do not worry about "proper" resolutions so much, as long as the aspect is correct. I recently downloaded some files for testing via torrents. Now in the case of one film in particular , every copy I found had the same butchering to it when it came to aspect ratio. That file which you can find easily is the 1994 film "The Little Rascals" . It was butchered because when downloaded from a torrent, it is in a 16x9 aspect ratio. Hhowever, the DVD that it was ripped from apparently was 4x3, so it was cropped when ripped. The bad part about that is that it was already cropped when presented in 4x3 and cropping it again yields only a fraction of the original frame. When I downloaded and viewed this file it looked very odd to me, although the quality was good tops of heads were frequently cut off, so I connected the old VHS and started comparing my old 4x3 aspect VHS tape of this movie with the downloaded 16x9 version. I should see more on the sides of the 16x9 from , however in this case I see less of the top and bottom. Clearly that file on the torrents (700.18 Meg) was from a 4x3 aspect DVD then cropped to 16x9. This is a horrible mistake for anyone ripping DVDs!
Comments about my downloads
I want to clarify that my downloads were for testing purposes, and all downloads were of movies that I already own original media. Since I do own original media, I do not feel that I am infringing on copyrights by downloading a back - up copy.
Jan 15, 2009
Internet Peering in Mexico - What happens in Mexico should stay in Mexico!
Well after having written the previous post a year ago about Internet peering in Mexico, even more bad news has come to light.
After having tried to use Telecable in Puerto Vallarta, and Telecable in Zapopan for a specific use that would connect two locations together, we see the following
ping -t 201.130.248.XXX
Pinging 201.130.248.XXX with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=344ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=343ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=413ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=303ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=299ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=309ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=353ms TTL=49
First Packet Loss! Second We see that there is EXCESSIVE latency caused by Protel who chose to ignore the issue because I was not their client directly! Not to mention this example all data goes from Mexico to USA TWICE! First to Level3 then to McAllen Texas via Protel. There is also 200ms of Latency between Laredo and Monterrey!
1 8 ms 7 ms 7 ms 200-56-193-1-cable.cybercable.net.mx [200.56.193.1]
2 43 ms 69 ms 79 ms 148.243.116.10
3 71 ms 84 ms 98 ms dial-200-57-215-25.zone-3.dial.net.mx [200.57.215.25]
4 101 ms 89 ms 63 ms 148.245.252.217
5 84 ms 68 ms 69 ms dial-200-39-230-53.zone-1.dial.net.mx [200.39.230.53]
6 118 ms * 68 ms 200.33.208.129
7 116 ms 108 ms 107 ms pos6/0.rr1.torixt.avantel.net.mx [200.33.208.201]
8 117 ms 93 ms 102 ms 200.33.208.150
9 100 ms 119 ms 99 ms na-224-21.na.avantel.net.mx [148.245.224.21]
10 128 ms 133 ms * so-8-1.car2.Houston1.Level3.net [4.79.90.97]
11 116 ms 118 ms 131 ms ae-2-5.bar2.Houston1.Level3.net [4.69.132.238]
12 130 ms 102 ms 96 ms ae-0-11.bar1.Houston1.Level3.net [4.69.137.133]
13 72 ms 50 ms 76 ms ae-13-13.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.137.138]
14 117 ms 141 ms 113 ms ae-71-71.csw2.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.136.126]
15 123 ms 104 ms 137 ms ae-2-79.edge2.Dallas3.Level3.net [4.68.19.76]
16 128 ms 134 ms 137 ms Tiscali-Level3.Dallas3.Level3.net [4.68.110.158]
17 109 ms * 91 ms protel-inext-gw.ip.tiscali.net [77.67.68.146]
18 91 ms 106 ms 121 ms ge-0-0-0.core01-lar.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.45]
19 293 ms 309 ms 300 ms as-1.core01-mty.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.109]
20 354 ms * 343 ms po-5-0.inext01-slp.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.230]
21 346 ms 328 ms * po-4-0.core01-ira.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.237]
22 334 ms 327 ms 352 ms po-1-0.core01-mcallen.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.225]
23 * 341 ms 365 ms po-2-1.core01-gdl.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.90]
24 348 ms 313 ms 287 ms 134.142.52.200.static.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.142.134]
25 * * * Request timed out.
26 * * * Request timed out.
27 * 319 ms * 201-130-248-XX-cable.cybercable.net.mx [201.130.248.XX]
28 310 ms 311 ms 296 ms 201-130-248-XX-cable.cybercable.net.mx [201.130.248.XX]
Trace complete.
What an embarrassment!
___________________________________________
UPDATE JAN 17, 2009
Here is the biggest lie that LACNIC could make
http://www.lacnic.net/documentos/lacnicxi/presentaciones/peeringmexico.ppt
GO ahead check it out. Then see the traceroute above and know that Inext refers to Protel that supposedly does peering with Telmex IN MEXICO according to that document. Furthermore here is more proof, and know that this traceroute is from Guadalajara TO Guadalajara.
traceroute to 187.140.21.XXX (187.140.21.XXX), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 10.206.0.1 (10.206.0.1) 10.468 ms 10.491 ms 10.483 ms
2 10.255.255.1 (10.255.255.1) 183.849 ms 184.379 ms 184.971 ms
3 router.cybercable.net.mx (200.53.250.10) 184.142 ms 184.734 ms 184.402 ms
4 45.142.52.200.static.redip.inext.net.mx (200.52.142.45) 185.121 ms 186.734 ms 186.383 ms
5 * * *
6 ge-0-0.core02-lar.redip.inext.net.mx (200.52.143.46) 221.606 ms 260.877 ms 276.338 ms
7 xe-3-1-0-102.dal11.ip.tiscali.net (77.67.68.145) 284.812 ms 284.631 ms 28 5.410 ms
8 xe-2-0-0.sjc10.ip.tiscali.net (89.149.187.189) 310.528 ms 310.724 ms 311. 439 ms
9 xe-0.equinix.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (206.223.116.12) 311.433 ms 311.43 5 ms 311.118 ms
10 as-0.r20.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.4.97) 321.067 ms 321.714 ms 321.788 ms
11 * * *
12 xe-7-1.r01.lsanca03.us.ce.gin.ntt.net (204.1.253.70) 267.349 ms 267.482 ms 268.159 ms
13 dsl-187-140-21-XXX.prod-infinitum.com.mx (187.140.21.167) 314.538 ms 323.7 40 ms 311.758 ms
Why does LACNIC think we are so stupid? This problem is getting WORSE, NOT BETTER, and it has only been one year since my last post on this topic.
Here is one last bit of proof that there is really no peering IN MEXICO regardless of what the lie of the day is at LACNIC
1 9 ms 7 ms 8 ms 200-56-193-1-cable.cybercable.net.mx [200.56.193.1]
2 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms 148.243.116.10
3 79 ms 72 ms 62 ms dial-200-57-215-25.zone-3.dial.net.mx [200.57.215.25]
4 13 ms 13 ms 16 ms 148.245.252.217
5 26 ms 23 ms 38 ms dial-200-39-230-53.zone-1.dial.net.mx [200.39.230.53]
6 55 ms 60 ms 101 ms 200.33.208.129
7 46 ms 46 ms 46 ms SAT1.ALTER.NET [63.65.121.165]
8 44 ms 45 ms 46 ms 0.so-4-1-0.XL4.SAT1.ALTER.NET [152.63.97.194]
9 104 ms 112 ms * 0.so-7-0-0.XT2.LAX7.ALTER.NET [152.63.115.237]
10 82 ms 82 ms 80 ms GigabitEthernet7-0-0.GW7.LAX7.ALTER.NET [152.63.118.53]
11 75 ms 73 ms 76 ms telmex-gw.customer.alter.net [157.130.246.70]
12 76 ms 77 ms 74 ms iadsl-jal-bandera-16-ge7-0-0.uninet.net.mx [201.125.11.240]
13 126 ms 135 ms 109 ms dsl-187-140-21-XXX.prod-infinitum.com.mx [187.140.21.XXX]
The peering here again also seems to be in USA.'
I welcome a reply from LACNIC on this subject.
_________________________________________________
UPDATE January 29, 1009
LACNIC replied and the complete response is in the comments section, as well as my follow up. The short version is that apparently the powerpoint document referenced is not an official LACNIC document. I must then ask, why then is it posted on the LACNIC web site?
Secondly, The document refers to "ISP Peering in Mexico", not "Mexican ISP Peering in the USA" The difference again is the latency and at least one of the traceroutes shows that data is apparently being handed off in the USA between Mexican ISPs. It does therefore NOT qualify as "ISP Peering in Mexico", although may involve Mexican ISPs peering in the USA.
Thirdly, the peering diagram on page 6 also does not involve PURELY ISP peering. A closer look at those companies indicates that most, if not all are involved in telephone traffic. Now that more providers are using VoIP those "private connections" are more suitable for telephone traffic as they are more direct than sending the traffic to the internet. ^The latency involved , and unknown variables of the internet (via other connections) are less desirable, so naturally those ISPS (really meaning telcos) are filling those private connections to full capacity with telephone calls, and leaving little or no capacity for real dedicated internet peering.
I think a good possible solution is that some neutral organization needs to be created and ANY Licensed internet provider should be REQUIRED to interconnect through this independent third party in a major city such as Guadalajara or Mexico DF. Monterrey is too far to the north for most users in Mexico in my opinion. These mandatory internet connections should NOT BE USED FOR INTRA-CARRIER TELEPHONE TRAFFIC! Instead, they should be pure internet peering, and may be used for intra-carrier telephone traffic, only when saturated less than 50% to BOTH carriers involved. For example, if the bestel connection was at 80% average and the Avantel was at 40% Avantel should not send traffic to Bestel through this new peering route. If BOTH however were at 30% , then they may saturate it with internet and telephone traffic up to 70% however giving priority to INTERNET traffic, and use their own direct interconnections for telephone peering.
The example of these "peering" connections, is a perfect example of the types of conflicts of interests that hold Mexico back , and are ridden with the anti-competitive attitudes. This backward thinking should not hold back the evolution of the internet in Mexico and we should take steps to ensure that internet growth and performance in Mexico is more controlled. To do this the assistance of COFETEL and/or SCT will be necessary to make new requirements to ensure proper growth of the internet IN MEXICO as internet demand increases IN MEXICO. AT the same time, this new independent organization should also begin to interconnect internationally where necessary, specifically making more direct international connections that do not rely on sending traffic destined to Argentina via the USA. With this new philosophy we can give Mexico its own internet backbone, and Mexico can begin to lead the way in offering internet solutions such as hosting FROM MEXICO for all of Latin America, as well as serve as a robust gateway for traffic destined for the USA. Mexico makes an appropriate "internet gateway" to the USA from the rest of Latin America for it's physical proximity to the USA.
This all goes along with another one of my beliefs : WE AS MEXICANS, should not look to go where life is better, but to make MEXICO a better place to live!
________________________________________________________________________________
UPDATE February 1, 2009
After making this post and ranting about these problems with Protel, LACNIC, Telecable, and many others this page as received visits from many of those organizations, and I am happy to report that the situation has improved. By my most recent tests on the Telecable Puerto Vallarta / Telecable Guadalajara connection show an average of about 150ms. Previously it was twice that! I can say however I have not performed a single traceroute that showed domestic peering to date. I have seen Mexican providers peering, but those connections appear to be in the USA, which is not "Mexico Peering" .
I also want to point out that a part of this Telecable issue stems from the fact that they use one provider in Guadalajara and another in Puerto Vallarta and have none of their own infrastructure between those two cities, to keep data from Telecable to Telecable on their own network. Instead they route it to the respective providers in each city, who route it to the USA and back to Mexico again. EVERY licensed provider that operates in multiple cities should be required to have their own infrastructure for data from their network to their network, or they are only contributing to the problem.
After having tried to use Telecable in Puerto Vallarta, and Telecable in Zapopan for a specific use that would connect two locations together, we see the following
ping -t 201.130.248.XXX
Pinging 201.130.248.XXX with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=344ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=343ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=413ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=303ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=299ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=309ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=353ms TTL=49
First Packet Loss! Second We see that there is EXCESSIVE latency caused by Protel who chose to ignore the issue because I was not their client directly! Not to mention this example all data goes from Mexico to USA TWICE! First to Level3 then to McAllen Texas via Protel. There is also 200ms of Latency between Laredo and Monterrey!
1 8 ms 7 ms 7 ms 200-56-193-1-cable.cybercable.net.mx [200.56.193.1]
2 43 ms 69 ms 79 ms 148.243.116.10
3 71 ms 84 ms 98 ms dial-200-57-215-25.zone-3.dial.net.mx [200.57.215.25]
4 101 ms 89 ms 63 ms 148.245.252.217
5 84 ms 68 ms 69 ms dial-200-39-230-53.zone-1.dial.net.mx [200.39.230.53]
6 118 ms * 68 ms 200.33.208.129
7 116 ms 108 ms 107 ms pos6/0.rr1.torixt.avantel.net.mx [200.33.208.201]
8 117 ms 93 ms 102 ms 200.33.208.150
9 100 ms 119 ms 99 ms na-224-21.na.avantel.net.mx [148.245.224.21]
10 128 ms 133 ms * so-8-1.car2.Houston1.Level3.net [4.79.90.97]
11 116 ms 118 ms 131 ms ae-2-5.bar2.Houston1.Level3.net [4.69.132.238]
12 130 ms 102 ms 96 ms ae-0-11.bar1.Houston1.Level3.net [4.69.137.133]
13 72 ms 50 ms 76 ms ae-13-13.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.137.138]
14 117 ms 141 ms 113 ms ae-71-71.csw2.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.136.126]
15 123 ms 104 ms 137 ms ae-2-79.edge2.Dallas3.Level3.net [4.68.19.76]
16 128 ms 134 ms 137 ms Tiscali-Level3.Dallas3.Level3.net [4.68.110.158]
17 109 ms * 91 ms protel-inext-gw.ip.tiscali.net [77.67.68.146]
18 91 ms 106 ms 121 ms ge-0-0-0.core01-lar.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.45]
19 293 ms 309 ms 300 ms as-1.core01-mty.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.109]
20 354 ms * 343 ms po-5-0.inext01-slp.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.230]
21 346 ms 328 ms * po-4-0.core01-ira.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.237]
22 334 ms 327 ms 352 ms po-1-0.core01-mcallen.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.225]
23 * 341 ms 365 ms po-2-1.core01-gdl.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.90]
24 348 ms 313 ms 287 ms 134.142.52.200.static.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.142.134]
25 * * * Request timed out.
26 * * * Request timed out.
27 * 319 ms * 201-130-248-XX-cable.cybercable.net.mx [201.130.248.XX]
28 310 ms 311 ms 296 ms 201-130-248-XX-cable.cybercable.net.mx [201.130.248.XX]
Trace complete.
What an embarrassment!
___________________________________________
UPDATE JAN 17, 2009
Here is the biggest lie that LACNIC could make
http://www.lacnic.net/documentos/lacnicxi/presentaciones/peeringmexico.ppt
GO ahead check it out. Then see the traceroute above and know that Inext refers to Protel that supposedly does peering with Telmex IN MEXICO according to that document. Furthermore here is more proof, and know that this traceroute is from Guadalajara TO Guadalajara.
traceroute to 187.140.21.XXX (187.140.21.XXX), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 10.206.0.1 (10.206.0.1) 10.468 ms 10.491 ms 10.483 ms
2 10.255.255.1 (10.255.255.1) 183.849 ms 184.379 ms 184.971 ms
3 router.cybercable.net.mx (200.53.250.10) 184.142 ms 184.734 ms 184.402 ms
4 45.142.52.200.static.redip.inext.net.mx (200.52.142.45) 185.121 ms 186.734 ms 186.383 ms
5 * * *
6 ge-0-0.core02-lar.redip.inext.net.mx (200.52.143.46) 221.606 ms 260.877 ms 276.338 ms
7 xe-3-1-0-102.dal11.ip.tiscali.net (77.67.68.145) 284.812 ms 284.631 ms 28 5.410 ms
8 xe-2-0-0.sjc10.ip.tiscali.net (89.149.187.189) 310.528 ms 310.724 ms 311. 439 ms
9 xe-0.equinix.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (206.223.116.12) 311.433 ms 311.43 5 ms 311.118 ms
10 as-0.r20.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.4.97) 321.067 ms 321.714 ms 321.788 ms
11 * * *
12 xe-7-1.r01.lsanca03.us.ce.gin.ntt.net (204.1.253.70) 267.349 ms 267.482 ms 268.159 ms
13 dsl-187-140-21-XXX.prod-infinitum.com.mx (187.140.21.167) 314.538 ms 323.7 40 ms 311.758 ms
Why does LACNIC think we are so stupid? This problem is getting WORSE, NOT BETTER, and it has only been one year since my last post on this topic.
Here is one last bit of proof that there is really no peering IN MEXICO regardless of what the lie of the day is at LACNIC
1 9 ms 7 ms 8 ms 200-56-193-1-cable.cybercable.net.mx [200.56.193.1]
2 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms 148.243.116.10
3 79 ms 72 ms 62 ms dial-200-57-215-25.zone-3.dial.net.mx [200.57.215.25]
4 13 ms 13 ms 16 ms 148.245.252.217
5 26 ms 23 ms 38 ms dial-200-39-230-53.zone-1.dial.net.mx [200.39.230.53]
6 55 ms 60 ms 101 ms 200.33.208.129
7 46 ms 46 ms 46 ms SAT1.ALTER.NET [63.65.121.165]
8 44 ms 45 ms 46 ms 0.so-4-1-0.XL4.SAT1.ALTER.NET [152.63.97.194]
9 104 ms 112 ms * 0.so-7-0-0.XT2.LAX7.ALTER.NET [152.63.115.237]
10 82 ms 82 ms 80 ms GigabitEthernet7-0-0.GW7.LAX7.ALTER.NET [152.63.118.53]
11 75 ms 73 ms 76 ms telmex-gw.customer.alter.net [157.130.246.70]
12 76 ms 77 ms 74 ms iadsl-jal-bandera-16-ge7-0-0.uninet.net.mx [201.125.11.240]
13 126 ms 135 ms 109 ms dsl-187-140-21-XXX.prod-infinitum.com.mx [187.140.21.XXX]
The peering here again also seems to be in USA.'
I welcome a reply from LACNIC on this subject.
_________________________________________________
UPDATE January 29, 1009
LACNIC replied and the complete response is in the comments section, as well as my follow up. The short version is that apparently the powerpoint document referenced is not an official LACNIC document. I must then ask, why then is it posted on the LACNIC web site?
Secondly, The document refers to "ISP Peering in Mexico", not "Mexican ISP Peering in the USA" The difference again is the latency and at least one of the traceroutes shows that data is apparently being handed off in the USA between Mexican ISPs. It does therefore NOT qualify as "ISP Peering in Mexico", although may involve Mexican ISPs peering in the USA.
Thirdly, the peering diagram on page 6 also does not involve PURELY ISP peering. A closer look at those companies indicates that most, if not all are involved in telephone traffic. Now that more providers are using VoIP those "private connections" are more suitable for telephone traffic as they are more direct than sending the traffic to the internet. ^The latency involved , and unknown variables of the internet (via other connections) are less desirable, so naturally those ISPS (really meaning telcos) are filling those private connections to full capacity with telephone calls, and leaving little or no capacity for real dedicated internet peering.
I think a good possible solution is that some neutral organization needs to be created and ANY Licensed internet provider should be REQUIRED to interconnect through this independent third party in a major city such as Guadalajara or Mexico DF. Monterrey is too far to the north for most users in Mexico in my opinion. These mandatory internet connections should NOT BE USED FOR INTRA-CARRIER TELEPHONE TRAFFIC! Instead, they should be pure internet peering, and may be used for intra-carrier telephone traffic, only when saturated less than 50% to BOTH carriers involved. For example, if the bestel connection was at 80% average and the Avantel was at 40% Avantel should not send traffic to Bestel through this new peering route. If BOTH however were at 30% , then they may saturate it with internet and telephone traffic up to 70% however giving priority to INTERNET traffic, and use their own direct interconnections for telephone peering.
The example of these "peering" connections, is a perfect example of the types of conflicts of interests that hold Mexico back , and are ridden with the anti-competitive attitudes. This backward thinking should not hold back the evolution of the internet in Mexico and we should take steps to ensure that internet growth and performance in Mexico is more controlled. To do this the assistance of COFETEL and/or SCT will be necessary to make new requirements to ensure proper growth of the internet IN MEXICO as internet demand increases IN MEXICO. AT the same time, this new independent organization should also begin to interconnect internationally where necessary, specifically making more direct international connections that do not rely on sending traffic destined to Argentina via the USA. With this new philosophy we can give Mexico its own internet backbone, and Mexico can begin to lead the way in offering internet solutions such as hosting FROM MEXICO for all of Latin America, as well as serve as a robust gateway for traffic destined for the USA. Mexico makes an appropriate "internet gateway" to the USA from the rest of Latin America for it's physical proximity to the USA.
This all goes along with another one of my beliefs : WE AS MEXICANS, should not look to go where life is better, but to make MEXICO a better place to live!
________________________________________________________________________________
UPDATE February 1, 2009
After making this post and ranting about these problems with Protel, LACNIC, Telecable, and many others this page as received visits from many of those organizations, and I am happy to report that the situation has improved. By my most recent tests on the Telecable Puerto Vallarta / Telecable Guadalajara connection show an average of about 150ms. Previously it was twice that! I can say however I have not performed a single traceroute that showed domestic peering to date. I have seen Mexican providers peering, but those connections appear to be in the USA, which is not "Mexico Peering" .
I also want to point out that a part of this Telecable issue stems from the fact that they use one provider in Guadalajara and another in Puerto Vallarta and have none of their own infrastructure between those two cities, to keep data from Telecable to Telecable on their own network. Instead they route it to the respective providers in each city, who route it to the USA and back to Mexico again. EVERY licensed provider that operates in multiple cities should be required to have their own infrastructure for data from their network to their network, or they are only contributing to the problem.
Jan 2, 2009
VoLAN and WiFi Can create some exciting possibilities
Recently I had the opportunity to devise a sysyem for VoLAN (Voice over LAN) to offer a very unique solution.
The details of the project can be found at:
http://www.teknogeekz.com/RemoteDoorWifiSIP.htm , however I have posted a basic diagram below.
The project employed a unique device from Cyberdata which is a doorbell intercom. The wireless router shown is an over-simplification of the extensive Wireless Network that was already on site. Clearly the applications for SIP are growing when we begin to see devices available that have such limited, although useful applications such as the CyberData Intercom. What impressed me more however was the QuickPhones WiFI Handset , specifically it's Peer to Peer mode.
Part of the reason why this was such a good solution was the existing WiFi infrastructure that gave us better coverage than any long range cordless phone would have.
Since these devices were not relying on a server, we used P2P mode. The QuickPhones offers a P2P mode that allows IP address dialing via it's Phone book feature. This allowed us to set up multiple destinations instead of a "hotline" from the WiFi phone. This gave us the unexpected but much appreciated possibility of having more than one destination accessible from the WiFi handset. With a system like this one can easily establish intercom and possible PBX like functionality with no server, even with the functionality of PSTN lines via a device like an SPA 3102.
In the coming months I hope to have more time to explore such possibilities, and if any readers have any comments on the P2P functionality of the Quickphones , I would like to hear comments.
The details of the project can be found at:
http://www.teknogeekz.com/RemoteDoorWifiSIP.htm , however I have posted a basic diagram below.
The project employed a unique device from Cyberdata which is a doorbell intercom. The wireless router shown is an over-simplification of the extensive Wireless Network that was already on site. Clearly the applications for SIP are growing when we begin to see devices available that have such limited, although useful applications such as the CyberData Intercom. What impressed me more however was the QuickPhones WiFI Handset , specifically it's Peer to Peer mode.Part of the reason why this was such a good solution was the existing WiFi infrastructure that gave us better coverage than any long range cordless phone would have.
Since these devices were not relying on a server, we used P2P mode. The QuickPhones offers a P2P mode that allows IP address dialing via it's Phone book feature. This allowed us to set up multiple destinations instead of a "hotline" from the WiFi phone. This gave us the unexpected but much appreciated possibility of having more than one destination accessible from the WiFi handset. With a system like this one can easily establish intercom and possible PBX like functionality with no server, even with the functionality of PSTN lines via a device like an SPA 3102.
In the coming months I hope to have more time to explore such possibilities, and if any readers have any comments on the P2P functionality of the Quickphones , I would like to hear comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)