Beijing Paradise BBS Backup

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ Beijing Paradise BBS Backup / PARADISE.ISO / software / BBSDOORW / FNEWSA21.ZIP / FIDO1021.NWS next >

Wrap

Text File | 1993-05-24 | 60.0 KB | 1,149 lines

F I D O N E W S -- Vol.10 No.21 (24-May-1993) +----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ | A newsletter of the | | | FidoNet BBS community | Published by: | | _ | | | / \ | "FidoNews" BBS | | /|oo \ | +1-519-570-4176 1:1/23 | | (_| /_) | | | _`@/_ \ _ | Editors: | | | | \ \\ | Sylvia Maxwell 1:221/194 | | | (*) | \ )) | Donald Tees 1:221/192 | | |__U__| / \// | Tim Pozar 1:125/555 | | _//|| _\ / | | | (_/(_|(____/ | | | (jm) | Newspapers should have no friends. | | | -- JOSEPH PULITZER | +----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ | Submission address: editors 1:1/23 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Internet addresses: | | | | Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca | | Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca | | Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com | | Both Don & Sylvia (submission address) | | editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | For information, copyrights, article submissions, | | obtaining copies and other boring but important details, | | please refer to the end of this file. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ ======================================================================== Table of Contents ======================================================================== 1. Editorial..................................................... 2 2. Articles...................................................... 3 Subject: The lies of Derek Balling.......................... 3 Requesting a Fidonet Number?................................ 4 Sensible BBS names in the Nodelist.......................... 6 Cost Sharing Ripoffs & Other Assorted Tidbits............... 6 Texas Employment Commission (update)........................ 8 What Is StormNet?........................................... 9 Dark Fibre, Dumb Network.................................... 11 3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 20 FidoNews 10-21 Page: 2 24 May 1993 ======================================================================== Editorial ======================================================================== There are two articles in the snooze this week that respond to Mr. Balling's article a few weeks back. If you remember, that article was over his being dropped from the nodelist. There are a few points that we, as editors, would like to make about both the original article and the responses. We do not have any way of knowing who is right and who is wrong, or even if anybody is wrong in a situation like this. We receive articles, and we print them. It is up to those that are familiar with the situation to attempt to give both sides of the story. Be that as it may, there are *always* two or more sides to a story. Fidonet is run, and works, because a great number of people donate a great deal of time and effort into making it work. It is not at all unusual for one person to expect undue amounts of work from a volunteer, or to complain bitterly when they do not get the snap-to-it reaction that they expect. It is unfair for people to read one side of any story, then take a harsh stance without hearing the other side. In addition, we and Tom Jennings before us have always pushed for as few formal rules as possible within the net; this entire episode illustrates one of the main reasons why. If Mr. Balling had the ability to simply apply to another net for a node number, then the dispute would be over. How annoying is "excessively annoying"? The question would be a lot easier to answer if policy 4 did not have a "rule" putting one person in charge of an entire geographic area. Nets could operate like echos: if you do not like one, start another. Finally, we are running the second half of the "dark fibre" article this week. For those too technically impatient to wade through the entire thing, Mr. Gilder makes an extremely strong case that the replacement of the entire switched telephone system is inevitable from both cost and technical standpoints. In it's place, he envisions a single world-wide fiber link, common to all, and operating more akin to an ethernet cable than a switched network. The implications for BBSing are profound. If all computer-to-computer communication is "local", and every BBS in the net is connected in real-time to every other computer in the the net (*including the users*!), just what purpose would policy 4 serve? Indeed, what purpose would the sysop or the BBS serve? The entire structure of everything we do will be radically changed. Personally, I would put more credence in Mr. Guilder's vision than in the vision of policy 5 ever becoming reality <S>. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 3 24 May 1993 ======================================================================== Articles ======================================================================== Subject: The lies of Derek Balling From: Richard Ploski (1:272/74) To: Editors (1:221/192) I just read your post concerning Derek Balling's nonsense - I had no idea that it had spread further than this net, and am saddened to see that the twisted facts, which he insists are true, continue spreading. I too am relatively new to net 272, and the net I see is much different than the one which Derek has created in imaginary world of evil fascists and other horrible people who are `out to get him'. My experience with Janis Kracht, our NC has been nothing but positive. In my early days in the net, several months ago, I was running an early beta of VFido (the VBBS FIDO interface) and was impressed by her support and willingness to help me. And while she did give me a certain time period in which I had to `get compatible with the network' I did not see this as being dictatorial, but rather as a sensible move by an NC who was working with the best interests of the network in mind. I too was faced with the long distance calls which Derek complained about. But unlike Derek I did not just decide to do whatever I wanted and tell Janis if she did not like it too bad - instead I approached my netmail server and asked if I could pick up the two local nets from him. He was agreeable and together we approached Janis and my echomail server, Anthony Grillo, who gave their blessing to the switch. Sorry, but Derek wants you to believe that he is the rebel-saviour of net 272, but it seems that he is more akin to Don Quixote, chasing demons of his own creation. Derek chose to publicly, and quite rudely, do whatever he wanted without regard to the wishes of the NC and _other members_ of the net. He was asked to stop a number of times - he refused, claiming that we were the dupes of an evil fascist regime and that he would save us all. He also publicly refused to acceed to the NC's requests to cease and desist and would not listen to reason if it conflicted with his distorted perception of the reality here in the network. Net 272 is now in a wonderful state of evolution - the polling system is being changed dramatically and soon there will be no one who will have to make a LD call to pick up echos. But you see, Derek wanted to be in charge, Derek wanted Janis and the rest of us to bow to *his* wishes and acceed to *his* ideas - and rather than `play ball' with the rest of us, he wanted to rewrite the rules and create his own game. And to be perfectly honest, I much prefer Fidonet to `Derek BallingNET'. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 4 24 May 1993 I am saddened to see that this nonsense has gone this far... Best Regards, Richard Ploski Delusions of Grandeur 1:272/74 *CC: Doug Mclean @1:255/9 FIDOnet *CC: Editors @1:1/23 FIDOnet *CC: Janis Kracht @1:272/0 FIDOnet ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Requesting a Fidonet Number? By: Robert Diepenbrock (1:2330/18) My Experiences in obtaining a Fidonet node number (As Policy 4 Turns!) The experience of obtaining a Fidonet node number varies, almost as much as there are people in this net. Where my experience may differ from the normal run of the mill, I'd like to relate some specifics, and make some comments about my experiences. My fidonet story starts in January 1991, when I purchased my computer system. When I unpacked the 386/dx 25, loaded the modem and my personnel copy of Procom, little did I know the headaches and triumphs that awaited. Most can relate to my quest, first to run my own BBS and then to join Fidonet. Through seemingly endless hardware additions and modem initialization string changes while trying to configure 4 different software packages concurrently I finally managed to meet the Requirements of sending and receiving netmail. I owe much of this achievement to the help of a handful of sysops who basically did most of the work via a DOS doorway in my BBS. The early days were fraught with errors, down time, lost mail, late nights, and a few days off of work, but through all my problems the local sysops remained supportive and helpful. The local sysops made entry into Fidonet an encouraging experience. But then, I moved. Barely 6 months after receiving my node number, I had to move to continue my education. Almost 2 years goes by before I can arrange to have a phone hooked to my computer. Again, as before, the Fidonet bug bite begin to cry for access to netmail. I had been calling some local boards by this time, using my off-line reader but Oh to have access to direct netmail once again. You see, I like the religious echoes and I found some of the limits within them to be constraining. Though I attempted to stay within the guidelines, I longed for the days of old when I could just netmail folks to get the discussion out of the public grandstanding which often takes place on those echoes. My problem was that the phone line I was using was not mine, and nobody could call me direct. I could send and receive netmail, but I could not maintain a fidonet compatible mailer that anybody could call. I applied for a node number but was turned down, and rightly so. In the mean time, the local sysops are being generous and are starting to receive some of the type of echo I was interested in. Yes, I turned FidoNews 10-21 Page: 5 24 May 1993 into that old echomail junky self I once knew. Though I rarely posted more than 4 messages a day, I would read sometimes over 200. Once you start to read that many messages, you quickly learn the value of your time. My reading (and replying) was eventually limited to 3 echoes. I settled into having some brisk theological discussions which I enjoy. Now, I don't think I'm unreasonable (but who does?) I do, however, have some firm opinions. You guessed it, there was trouble in paradise. Though the echo's rules may stipulate "anybody can voice their opinion," don't believe it. There was a certain echo, which did not allow flames but the moderation staff generally did what they pleased regardless of the rules. Many were roasted and when they replied with disrespect, were promptly banished. I was toasted a few times along with the others who disagreed with the theology of the moderation staff. For the most part I ignored the hot parts of the posts, remained calm and continued the discussions, leaving the flaming issue alone. It was unfair, I did not like it, but what option did I have without netmail? You take the good with the bad sometimes. I bet you can guess what happens next... Yes, I was eventualy banished from that echo for what was apparently theological reasons (no actual reason was given by the moderator). Boy, I really wanted netmail then. Perhaps it was good I had to wait a few weeks or the moderator's inbound netmail would have been blazing. After all, one good flame deserves another, even if it is not a good idea to stir the fire once you pour gasoline on it. Oh how I longed for netmail! But alas my dreams began to be realized once again! Upon moving into a new office at work (with a new computer) the possibility of running a Fidonet node became a reality once again. After scarping up a 2400 baud modem and the backups of my old BBS, I set to work. A lot of stuff has changed in 2 years! I had to upgrade most of my software, and just flat change the rest! With a little help from my former Net Coordinator and a local sysop I was up and running again. Off went the node number request, and I begin to poll daily for replies. None. A few phone calls to the local Net Coordinator still produced little in response and in fact I seemed to get some resistance. What was going on? Looking back, I understand. It's not very often that someone gets banished from an echo. They were being careful, though the reasons they gave for delaying were rather lame against policy 4. After a talk with my old NC, I net-mailed the node request again, only this time making it clear that I had read policy 4 and expected a reason if I was to be turned down. (Yes, I'm a little bull headed sometimes.) I received my node number and have been mostly happy with fidonet ever since, except for one small thing. (Don't tell me you see it coming!) Yes, I went and did it. I contacted the moderator of the echo from which I was banished, BIG mistake. I resisted the urge to bring out the blow torch and hold his "feet over the fire" but I did voice my complaint about not being told exactly why I was banished and his apparent violation of his own "no flame" policy. The next day or two passes and I find out that this guy is trying to get my node number revoked by contacting my local NC! I may sometimes act like a "twit" but did I qualify for this? All my netmail in an effort to work this FidoNews 10-21 Page: 6 24 May 1993 out has gone unanswered to this point, but are you suprised? Did I deserve this? No, but I should have avoided it! One nice thing about Fidonet is you can choose to ignore some, without turning all off. His system now hangs up on mine, guess that ends the discussion. Though my experiences with fidonet members vary from friendly to hateful, I must say that it has been a good experience overall. People with differant views abound, besides if two agree on everything one is not necessary. In the future I look forward to working within fidonet and doing my part to return the favor of those sysops from my original net who helped me out and ignored my mistakes, by helping other fledgling fidonet sysops get their start, and put up with their mistakes while they too learn. Thanks to all the members who labor to keep this network running, growing and progressing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sensible BBS names in the Nodelist Keeping the NODELIST down to size by Terry Bowden 3:772/20 NC 772 Auckland New Zealand When new nodes approach me to join FidoNet, they give me the suggested title of their BBS to go into the nodelist. This is a free world, and so long as the title isn't obnoxiously profane, they can call it what they like. Of course, a name like This_is_my_own_BBS_and_I'm_proud_of_it would be a bit excessive, and I'd ask the newcomer to re-think. Now the nodelist is a listing of bulletin board systems, right? And every entry is a BBS, let's face it. So when I'm asked to list a newcomer as The_Lantern_BBS, I generally suggest that "_BBS" is not necessary. Then again, do you really need "The_" at the front as well? 99 out of 100 tend to agree with this, so we end up with the title "Lantern". May I suggest that users and coordinators take this approach? Unless there is some really burning reason to include the superfluous (not to mention redundant) parts of the titles, let's keep them brief. We might just save some electronic trees. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Cost Sharing Ripoffs & Other Assorted Tidbits by: Phillip M. Dampier 1:2613/228 In response to the article from Derek Balling in last week's Fidonews, let me offer the following views based on my experiences as a Net Coordinator in a Region 13 net for over two years. First, let me touch on cost sharing matters. The gouging is still continuing in many nets. Nodes need to add up the numbers for themselves. We are currently receiving well over 500 echos in Net 2613 and our total phone bill with MCI Primetime (without FidoNews 10-21 Page: 7 24 May 1993 Friends & Family as we connect with an RHUB that is not F&F compatible) is around $200.00. Ask how many echos your net imports and then add up your cost sharing x the number of nodes in your net, if you have a flat rate system in place. In many cases, the results will be staggering. There are some nets out there that charge a flat 5-10 dollars a month and have close to or over 100 nodes. Unless these nets are calling weekday afternoons for their mail, it's time to start questioning where the $500-1000 goes every month. It sure isn't going to MCI Friends & Family! Those people subjected to long distance rates AND cost sharing are prime candidates for net formation if they reside in a local/reduced rate calling area. It has been my personal experience that Bill Andrus, our RC, will grant net status to a small handful of nodes. Those of you in Net 272 who want to split have been talking about it since Moses walked on the earth. :-) In Region 13, here's how it works: Step 1 (Ross Perotism): Get the people who want to split together at a meeting, draw up a list of candidates to run for Net Coordinator and Net Echomail Coordinator, have a free and fair election among all nodes qualified to vote in your new net, then have the Net Coordinator draw up a nodelist segment and rough sense of what your net will encompass as far as area. Step 2: Have your newly elected NC crashmail a copy of the nodelist fragment to both Ms. Kracht and Mr. Andrus. It has been my personal experience in dealing with breakaway nets in Region 13 that Bill Andrus will immediately grant a net number to the breakaway group. When you are granted your net number, have the elected NC contact your existing NC and tell her to remove those people in the new net from her nodelist update. The basic reality is that she has very little say over the formation of new nets in your area. The reality in Region 13 is that Bill Andrus decides. You have an excellent case if there is a group of you in a local calling area that could save considerably on cost sharing. The other simple truth in Region 13 is that filing policy complaints is a complete waste of time. Bill Andrus doesn't want to waste time getting involved in personality disputes, so just drop that matter and get on with the business of getting a new net and your number reinstated. While I don't know both sides of the story surrounding your dismissal from Fidonet, if the things you quoted were true, this would be one of the more bizarre set of rules I've seen in Fidonet and none of them are grounds for dismissal in Fidonet. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 8 24 May 1993 Finally, you were wrong to have installed a commercial copy of Frontdoor on your system. I just don't buy your explanation, considering the number of references to the "commercial" vs. "non-commercial" software that make both versions distinct. I am glad to hear you did switch back to the non-commercial version. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Texas Employment Commission (update) I read with excitement the article regarding the TEA-HR BBS in F I D O N E W S -- Vol.10 No.19 (10-May-1993). Unfortunately, there were a couple of criticial errors. Maybe you would be willing to republish the article or the corrections: 1. The organization is the Texas Education Agency (State Board of Education and State Education Department). Also, our net/node number has been changed due to a local conflict to 1:382/6. Texas Employment Commission Larry Loiselle (1:382/16) Texas Education Agency 1701 North Congress Avenue Austin, Texas 78701 The Texas Education Agency has embarked on an aggressive recruitment program in order to reach the broadest possible population. In order to accomplish this mission, the agency will be posting its job vacancies with the Texas Employment Commission and the twenty Education Service Centers. We will also be posting our job vacancies on TENET and the following public bulletin board system (BBS) networks: FidoNet (Jobs-Now message echo), FamilyNet (Jobseek message echo), and KesherNet (Education echo). The messages (job vacancy notices) posted on these networks are gated to EchoNet, UseNet, and InterNet. TENET may be accessed at (512) 472-0602. Public BBSes carrying FidoNet, FamilyNet, and KesherNet message echos can be found all across the U.S.A., Canada, and many foreign countries. These public BBSes may be found in most major cities and many smaller communities. To assist those who do not have access to these TENET or these public BBSes, the Texas Education Agency, Human Resource Division, is running its own BBS: TEA-HR BBS (512) 475-3689 300-9600 Baud N-8-1 V32, V42, V42bis 24 hours per day 7 days per week FidoNews 10-21 Page: 9 24 May 1993 FidoNet Net/Node Number: 1:382/6 FamilyNet Net/Node Number: 8:71/5 Please call our BBS at your convenience. Information on types of jobs, salaries, and fringe benefits is available. The current job vacancy notices are available for review and downloading. You may also receive and/or leave messages for the Human Resources Division. Also, you will be able to download copies of the job vacancy notices and upload copies of your resumes to us. 3. If they want to mail us their resumes, please send them, plus a cover letter noting where they heard the news and what kind of job they are seeking. We would appreciate some feedback on our effort. Letters and/or messages can be addressed to Lisa Adame, Recruiter; Harvester Pope, Director of Employment; or Dr. Roberto Zamora, Chief Of Operations. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- What Is StormNet? -------------------------------------------------------------------- ******* **** * * * * * ******* ***** **** **** ***** * * * **** ***** * * * * **** * * * * * * ** * ******* * **** * * * * * * **** **** * --------------------------------------------------------------------- I thought I would take the time to write about out network, StormNet. * What Is StormNet? StormNet is an alternative network for use with FidoNet compatible or QWK network software. We pass messages back and forth both in netmail and in echomail conferences. In StormNet, each node is welcomed and assisted in many ways by other StormNet members. We have active echomail areas and a growing file echo selection. Although the traffic in our echo areas is lower than in some other networks, StormNet has a more friendly atmosphere than can be found in many of those others. StormNet has been in existence for just over a year, and in that time, has grown significantly. Our membership has changed from an inexperienced group of local nodes to a more mature group of people from all over the United States, and even parts of Canada. Currently, we have over 50 nodes in this area, and are expanding every week! * Why is StormNet here? StormNet was started for a few reasons. When we created it, we wanted to serve teens, adults, and others worldwide with a quality FidoNews 10-21 Page: 10 24 May 1993 alternative network that is relatively cheap to pull in. Most of our high speed transfers take less than a minute. You don't have to poll every day, we are flexible and will allow you to poll whenever you like. We want to serve you with the finest quality echomail and files for you and your users. We are considerably smaller than FidoNet, and therefore do not have the overflow of mail often seen in its conferences. * What are the rules like? StormNet? Rules? You've got to be kidding me. Well, it's not like we don't have any rules; all of the rules in our policy statement basically stem from one basic principle - "Be nice and use common sense." The policy's specifics were written to outline some problems which may potentially arise when people aren't nice and don't use common sense. The SNAC (StormNet Advisory Council) consists of teenagers and adults. This group of fine folks helps to ensure the smooth running of StormNet affairs. StormNet does not discriminate against, deny, or turn someone down because of their age, sex, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, beliefs, taste in food, opinion on world politics, or favorite color. We welcome anyone who is interested in joining a fun network to try out StormNet. We also don't allow "bashing", spindling or other forms of mutilation of groups in our newsletters, or most of our echos, and other parts of our network. * What are the echos like? We have a variety of conferences to suit most needs. If you are a user of StormNet, or a node, you can request an echo if you feel it would be active. We have echos on many subjects, A to Z (as we say SN_A to SN_Z <g>). We have a talented staff of moderators and co-moderators, and combined with the efforts of our international echomail coordinator, keep the network running smoothly. * What are the file echos like? We offer file echos for our nodes too. Although we will not go into this matter much in this article, we have great files from all around. We don't allow trash to be hatched in our echos. Our file echo coordinator helps to coordinate our file echos. * Nodelists, Policies, and Newsfiles.. Our nodelist coordinator is dedicated to his nodelist management. He strives to make sure the nodelist that is released is as accurate as possible. The nodelist coordinator has never secretly switched the nodelist for new Folgers' Crystals :-) Our Literature Coordinator updates the policy and creates "StormNews", the official newsletter of StormNet. He also edits carefully other documents for StormNet. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 11 24 May 1993 In almost all cases, our nodelists and nodediffs are issued by Friday at 12am. In fact, we usually issue most periodicals before the Friday deadline. To make less calls necessary, all of StormNet's documents are released at about the same time. * Why should I consider StormNet? We respect each and every StormNet member and his/her rights. We offer our services to all. We are have a great network setup. We want all to join and have a good time in the network that we have created. We're proud of our network. You should look into us! Alan Jurison StormNet Int'l EchoMail Coordinator Philip Spevak StormNet International Coordinator You May F'req STORMNET (or STORMNET.*) From these nodes: System Name Phone/Baud Fido StormNet ---------------------------------------------------------------------- StormNet Int'l HQ (315)682-1824 (1:260/375) (181:181/1) 14400/v32b StormNet Coord. (315)445-5643 (1:260/374) (181:181/0) 2400 StormNet Canada (613)563-7164 (1:163/527) (182:1820/0) 9600/HST ---------------------------------------------------------------------- * See our Ads in FidoNet's OTHERNETS confrence for more polling sites * Thank you! Hope to see you soon! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dark Fibre, Dumb Network George Gilder / MCI ID: 409-1174 ....CONTINUED FROM LAST ISSUE LAW OF THE TELECOSM: NETWORKS DUMB AS A STONE The new regime will use fiber not as a replacement for copper wires but as a new form of far more capacious and error-free air. Through a system called wavelength division multiplexing and access, computers and telephones will tune into desired messages in the fibersphere the same way radios now tune into desired signals in the atmosphere. The fibersphere will be intrinsically as dumb and dark as the atmosphere. The new regime overcomes the electronic bottleneck by altogether banishing electronics from the network. But, ask the telcos in unison, what about the switches? As long as the network is switched, it must be partly electronic. Unless the network is switched, it is not a true any- to-any network. It is a broadcast system. It may offer a cornucopia of services. But it cannot serve as a common carrier like the phone network allowing any party to reach any other. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 12 24 May 1993 Without intelligent switching it cannot provide personal communications nets that can follow you wherever you go. Without intelligent switching, the all optical network, so they say, is just a glorified cable system. These critics fail to grasp a central rule of the telecosm: bandwidth is a nearly perfect substitute for switching. With sufficient physical bandwidth, it is possible to simulate any kind of logical switch whatsoever. Bandwidth allows creation of virtual switches that to the user seem to function exactly the way physical switches do. You can send all messages everywhere in the network, include all needed codes and instructions for correcting, decrypting, and reading them, and allow each terminal to tune into its own messages on its own wavelength, just like a two-way radio. When the terminals are smart enough and the bandwidth great enough, your all optical network can be as dumb as a stone. Over the last several years, all optical network experiments have been conducted around the world, from Bellcore in New Jersey to NTT at Yokosuka, Japan. British Telecom has used wavelength division multiplexing to link four telephone central offices in London. Columbia's Telecom Center has launched a Teranet that lacks tunable lasers or receivers but can logically simulate them. Bell Laboratories has generated most of the technology but as a long distance specialist has focussed on the project of sending gigabits of information thousands of miles without amplifiers. But only fully functional system is the Rainbow created by Paul Green at IBM. As happens so often in this a world of technical disciplines sliced into arbitrary fortes and fields, the large advances come from the integrators. Paul Green is neither a laser physicist, nor an optical engineer, nor a telecommunications theorist. At IBM, his work has ranged from overseeing speech recognition projects at Watson Labs to shaping company strategy at corporate headquarters in Armonk. His most recent success was supervising development of the new APPN (Advanced Peer to Peer Network) protocol. According to an IBM announcement in March, APPN will replace the venerable SNA (systems network architecture) that has been synonymous with IBM networking for more than a decade. Green took some pride in this announcement, but by that time, the project was long in his past. He was finishing the copy editing on his magisterial tome on Fiber Optic Networks (published this summer by Prentice Hall). And he was moving on to more advanced versions of the Rainbow which he and his team had introduced in December 1991 at the Telecom 91 Conference in Geneva and which has been installed between the various branches of Watson Laboratories in Westchester County, N.Y. As Peter Drucker points out, a new technology cannot displace an old one unless it is proven at least 10 times better. Otherwise the billions of dollars worth of installed base and thousands of engineers committed to improving the old technology will suffice to block the new one. The job of Paul Green's 15 man team at IBM is to meet that tenfold test. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 13 24 May 1993 Green's all optical network creates a fibersphere as neutral and passive as the atmosphere. It can be addressed by computers the same way radios and television sets connect to the air. Consisting entirely of unpowered glass and passive spitters and couplers, the fibersphere is dark and dumb. Any variety of terminals can interconnect across it at the same time using any protocols they choose. Just as radios in the atmosphere, computer receivers connected to the fibersphere do not find a series of bits in a message; they tune into a wavelength or frequency. Because available Fabry Perot tunable filters today have larger bandwidth than tunable lasers, Green chose to locate Rainbow's tuning at the receiver and have transmitters each operate at a fixed wavelength. But future networks can use any combination of tunable equipment at either end. When Green began the project in 1987, the industry stood in the same general position as the pioneers of radio in the early years of that industry. They had seemingly unlimited bandwidth before them, but lacked transmitters and receivers powerful enough to use it effectively. Radio transmitters suffered splitting losses as they broadcast their signals across the countryside. Green's optical messages lose power everytime they are split off to be sent to another terminal or are tapped by a receiver. The radio industry solved this problem by the development of the audion triode amplifier. Green needed an all optical amplifier to replace the optoelectronic repeaters that now constitute the most widespread electronic bottleneck in fiber. Amplifiers in current fiber networks first convert the optical signal to an electronic signal, enhance it, and then convert it back to photons. Like the pioneers of radio, Green soon had his amplifier in hand. Following concepts pioneered by David Payne at the University of Southhampton in England, a Bell Laboratories group led by Emmanuel Desurvire and Randy Giles developed a workable all optical device. They showed that a short stretch of fiber doped with erbium, a rare earth mineral, and excited by a cheap laser diode, can function as a powerful amplifier over the entire wavelength range of a 25,000 gigahertz system. Today such photonic amplifiers enhance signals in a working system of links between Naples and Pomezia on the west coast of Italy. Manufactured in packages between two and three cubic inches in size, these amplifiers fit anywhere in an optical network for enhancing signals without electronics. This invention overcame the most fundamental disadvantage of optical networks compared to electronic networks. You can tap into an electronic network as often as desired without weakening the voltage signal. Although resistance and capacitance will weaken the current, there are no splitting losses in a voltage divider. Photonic signals, by contrast, suffer splitting losses every time they are tapped; they lose photons until eventually there are none left. The cheap and compact all optical amplifier solves this problem. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 14 24 May 1993 Not only did Green and his IBM colleagues create working all optical networks, they also reduced the interface optoelectronics to a single microchannel plug-in card that can fit in any IBM PS/2 level personal computer or R6000 workstation. Using off-the-shelf components costing a total of $16,000 per station, Rainbow achieved a capacity more than 90 times greater than FDDI at an initial cost merely four times as much. Just as Jack Kilby's first ICs were not better than previous adders and oscillators, the Rainbow I is not better in some respects than rival networks based on electronics. At present it connects only 32 computers at a speed of some 300 megabits per second, for a total bandwidth of 9.5 gigabits. This rate is huge compared to most other networks, but it is still well below the target of a system that provides gigabit rates for every terminal. A more serious limitation is the lack of packet switching. Rather than communicating down a dedicated connection between two parties, like phones do, computer networks send data in small batches, called packets, each bearing its own address. This requires switching back and forth between packets millions of times a second. Neither the current Rainbow's lasers nor its filters can tune from one message to another more than thousands of times a second. This limitation is a serious problem for links to mainframes and supercomputers that may do many tasks at once in different windows on the screen and with connections to several other machines. As Green shows, however, all these problems are well on the way to solution. A tide of new interest in all optical systems is sweeping through the world's optical laboratories. The Pentagon's Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA) has launched a program for all optical networking. With Green installed as the new President of the IEEE Communications Society, the technical journals are full of articles on new wavelength division technology. Every few months brings new reports of a faster laser with a broader bandwidth, or filter with faster tuning, or an ingenious new way to use bandwidth to simulate packet switching. Today lasers and receivers can switch fast enough but they still lack the ability to cover the entire bandwidth needed. The key point, however, is that as demonstrated both in Geneva and Armonk, the Green system showed the potential efficiency of all optical systems. Even in their initial forms they are more cost effective in bandwidth per dollar than any other network technology. Scheduled for introduction within the next two years, Rainbow III will comprise a thousand stations operating at a gigabit a second, with the increasingly likely hope of fast packet switching capability. At that point, the system will be a compelling commercial product at least hundreds of times more cost effective than the competition. Without access to dark fiber, however, these networks will be worthless. If the telephone companies fail to supply it, they risk losing most of the fastest growing parts of their business: the data FidoNews 10-21 Page: 15 24 May 1993 traffic which already contributes some 50 percent of their profits. But there is also a possibility that they will lose much of their potential consumer business as well: the planned profits in pay-per-view films and electronic yellow pages. This is the message of a second great prophet of dark fiber, Will Hicks of Southbridge, Massachusetts. A venerable inventor of scores of optical products, Hicks believes that Green's view of the future of fiber is too limited. Using wavelength division, Hicks can see the way to deliver some 500 megahertz two-way connections to all the homes in America for some $400 per home. That is fifty times the 10 megahertz total capacity of an Ethernet (with no one else using it) for some 20 percent of the cost. That is capacity in each home for twenty digital two-way HDTV channels at once at perhaps half the cost of new telephone connections. Then, after a large consumer market emerges for fiber optics, Hicks believes, Green's sophisticated computer services will follow as a matter of course. The consumer market, Hicks maintains, is the key to lowering the cost of the components to a level where they can be widely used in office networks as well. He cites the example of the compact disk laser diode. Once lasers were large and complex devices, chilled with liquid nitrogen, and costing thousands of dollars; now they are as small as a grain of salt, cheap as a box of cereal, and more numerous than phonograph needles. An executive at Hitachi told Hicks that Hitachi could work a similar transformation on laser diodes and amplifiers for all optical networks. Just tell me what price you want to pay and I'll tell you how many you have to buy. The divergence of views between the IBM executive and the wildcat inventor, however, is far less significant than their common vision of dark fiber as the future of communications. By the power of ever cheaper bandwidth, it will transform all industries of the coming information age just as radically as the power of cheaper transistors transformed the industries of the computer age. For the telephone companies, the age of ever smarter terminals mandates the emergence of ever dumber networks. This is a major strategic challenge; it takes a smart man to build a dumb network. But the telcos have the best laboratories and have already developed nearly all the components of the fibersphere. Telephone companies may complain of the large costs of the transformation of their system, but they command capital budgets as large as the total revenues of the cable industry. Telcos may recoil in horror at the idea of dark fiber, but they command webs of the stuff ten times larger than any other industry. Dumb and dark networks may not fit the phone company self-image or advertising posture. But they promise larger markets than the current phone company plan to choke off their future in the labyrinthine nets of an intelligent switching fabric always behind schedule and full of software bugs. The telephone companies cannot expect to impose a uniform FidoNews 10-21 Page: 16 24 May 1993 network governed by universal protocols. The proliferation of digital protocols and interfaces is an inevitable effect of the promethean creativity of the computer industry. Green explains, You cannot fix the protocol zoo. You must use bandwidth to accommodate the zoo. As Robert Pokress, a former switch designer at Bell Labs now head of Unifi Corporation, points out, telephone switches (now 80 percent software) are already too complex to keep pace with the efflorescence of relatively simple computer technology on their periphery. While computers become ever more lean and mean, turning to reduced instruction set processors, networks need to adopt reduced instruction set architectures. The ultimate in dumb and dark is the fibersphere now incubating in their magnificent laboratories. The entrepreneurial folk in the computer industry may view this wrenching phone company adjustment with some satisfaction. But the fact is that computer companies face a strategic reorientation as radical as the telcos do. In a world where ever smarter terminals require ever dumber communications, computer networks are as gorged and glutted with smarts as phone company networks and even less capacious. The nation's most brilliant nerds, commanding the 200 MIPS Silicon Graphics superstations or Mac Quadra multimedia power plants, humbly kneel before the 50 kilobit lines of the Internet and beseech the telcos to upgrade to 64 kilobit basic ISDN. Now addicted to the use of transistors to solve the problems of limited bandwidth, the computer industry must use transistors to exploit the opportunities of nearly unlimited bandwidth. When home-based machines are optimized for manipulating high resolution digital video at high speeds, they will necessarily command what are now called supercomputer powers. This will mean that the dominant computer technology will emerge first not in the office market but in the consumer market. The major challenge for the computer industry is to change its focus from a few hundred million offices already full of computer technology to a billion living rooms now nearly devoid of it. Cable companies possess the advantage of already owning dumb networks based on the essentials of the all optical model of broadcast and select-- of customers seeking wavelengths or frequencies rather than switching circuits. Cable companies already provide all the programs to all the terminals and allow them to tune in to the desired messages. Uniquely in the world, U.S. cable firms already offer a broadband pipe to ninety percent of American homes. These coaxial cables, operating at one gigahertz for several hundred feet, provide the basis for two way broadband services today. But the cable industry cannot become a full service supplier of telecommunications until it changes its self-image from a cheap provider of one way entertainment services into a common carrier of two way information. Above all, the cable industry cannot succeed in the digital age if it continues to regard the personal computer as an alien and irrelevant machine. Analogous to the integrated circuit in its economic power, the FidoNews 10-21 Page: 17 24 May 1993 all optical network is analogous to the massively parallel computer in its technical paradigm. In the late 1980s in computers, the effort to make one processor function ever faster on a serial stream of data reached a point of diminishing returns. Superpipelining and superscalar gains hit their limits. Despite experiments with Josephson Junctions, high electron mobility, and cryogenics, usable transistors simply could not made to switch much faster than a few gigahertz. Computer architects responded by creating machines with multiple processors operating in parallel on multiple streams of data. While each processor worked more slowly than the fastest serial processors, thousands of slow processors in parallel could far outperform the fastest serial machines. Measured by cost effectiveness, the massively parallel machines dwarfed the performance of conventional supercomputers. The same pattern arose in communications and for many of the same reasons. In the early 1990s the effort to increase the number of bits that could be time division multiplexed down a fiber on a single frequency band had reached a point of diminishing returns. Again the switching speed of transistors was the show stopper. The architects of all optical networks responded by creating systems which can use not one wavelength or frequency but potentially thousands in parallel. Again, the new systems could not outperform time division multiplexing on one frequency. But all optical networks opened up a vast vista of some 75 thousand gigahertz of frequencies potentially usable for communications. That immense potential of massively parallel frequencies left all methods of putting more bits on a single set of frequencies look as promising as launching computers into the chill of outer space in order to accelerate their switching speeds. Just as the law of the microcosm made all terminals smart, distributing intelligence from the center to the edges of the network, so the law of the telecosm creates a network dumb enough to accommodate the incredible onrush of intelligence on its periphery. Indeed, with the one chip supercomputer on the way, manufacturable for under a hundred dollars toward the end of the decade, the law of the microcosm is still gaining momentum. The fibersphere complements the promise of ubiquitous computer power with equally ubiquitous communications. What happens, however, when not only transistors but also wires are nearly free? As Robert Lucky observes in his forward to Paul Green's book, Many of us have been conditioned to think that transmission is inherently expensive; that we should use switching and processing wherever possible to minimize transmission. This is the law of the microcosm. But as Lucky speculates, The limitless bandwidth of fiber optics changes these assumptions. Perhaps we should transmit signals thousands of miles to avoid even the simplest processing function. This is the law of the telecosm: use bandwidth to simplify everything else. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 18 24 May 1993 Daniel Hillis of Thinking Machines Corporation offers a similar vision, adding to Lucky's insight the further assertion that massively parallel computer architectures are so efficient that they can overthrow the personal computer revolution. Hillis envisages a powerplant computer model, with huge Thinking Machines at the center tapped by millions of relatively dumb terminals. All these speculations assume that the Law of the Telecosm usurps the Law of the Microcosm. But in fact the two concepts function in different ways in different domains. Electronic transistors use electrons to control, amplify, or switch electrons. But photonics differ radically from electronics. Because moving photons do not affect one another on contact, they cannot readily be used to control, amplify, or switch each other. Compared to electrons, moreover, photons are huge: infrared photons at 1550 or 1300 nanometers are larger than a micron across. They resist the miniaturization of the microcosm. For computing, photons are far inferior to electrons. With single electron electronics now in view, electrons will keep their advantage. For the foreseeable future, computers will be made with electrons. What are crippling flaws for photonic computing, however, are huge assets for communicating. Because moving photons do not collide with each other or respond to electronic charges, they are inherently a two way medium. They are immune to lightning strikes, electromagnetic pulses, or electrical power surges that destroy electronic equipment. Virtually noiseless and massless pulses of radiation, they move as fast and silently as light. Listening to the technology, as Caltech prophet Carver Mead recommends, one sees a natural division of labor between photonics and electronics. Photonics will dominate communications and electronics will dominate computing. The two technologies do not compete; they are beautiful complements of each other. The law of the microcosm makes distributed computers (smart terminals) more efficient regardless of the cost of linking them together. The law of the telecosm makes dumb and dark networks more efficient regardless of how numerous and smart are the terminals. Working together, however, these two laws of wires and switches impel ever more widely distributed information systems. It is the narrow bandwidth of current phone company connections that explains the persistence of centralized computing in a world of distributed machines. Narrowband connections require smart interfaces and complex protocols and expensive data. Thus you get your online information from only a few databases set up to accommodate queries over the phone lines. You limit television broadcasting to a few local stations. Using the relatively narrowband phone network or television system, it pays to concentrate memory and processing at one point and tap into the hub from thousands of remote locations. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 19 24 May 1993 Using a broadband fiber system, by contrast, it will pay to distribute memory and services to all points on the network. Broadband links will foster specialization. If the costs of communications are low, databases, libraries, and information services can specialize and be readily reached by customers from anywhere. On line services lose the economies of scale that lead a firm such as Dialog to attempt to concentrate most of the world's information in one set of giant archives. By making bandwidth nearly free, the new integrated circuit of the fibersphere will radically change the environment of all information industries and technologies. In all eras, companies tend to prevail by maximizing the use of the cheapest resources. In the age of the fibersphere, they will use the huge intrinsic bandwidth of fiber, all 25 thousand gigahertz or more, to replace nearly all the hundreds of billions of dollars worth of switches, bridges, routers, converters, codecs, compressors, error correctors, and other devices, together with the trillions of lines of software code, that pervade the intelligent switching fabric of both telephone and computer networks. The makers of all this equipment will resist mightily. But there is no chance that the old regime can prevail by fighting cheap and simple optics with costly and complex electronics and software. The all optical network will triumph for the same reason that the integrated circuit triumphed: it is incomparably cheaper than the competition. Today, measured by the admittedly rough metric of MIPS per dollar, a personal computer is more than one thousand times more cost effective than a mainframe. Within 10 years, the all optical network will be millions of times more cost effective than electronic networks. Just as the electron rules in computers, the photon will rule the waves of communication. The all optical ideal will not immediately usurp other technologies. Vacuum tubes reached their highest sales in the late 1970s. But just as the IC inexorably exerted its influence on all industries, the all optical technology will impart constant pressure on all other communications systems. Every competing system will have to adapt to its cost structure. In the end, almost all electronic communications will go through the wringer and emerge in glass. This is the real portent of the dark fiber case wending its way through the courts. The future of the information age depends on the rise of dumb and dark networks to accommodate the onrush of ever smarter electronics. Ultimately at stake is nothing less than the future of the computer and communications infrastructure of the U.S. economy, its competitiveness in world markets, and the consummation of the age of information. Although the phone companies do not want to believe it, their future will be dark. FidoNews 10-21 Page: 20 24 May 1993 ======================================================================== Fidonews Information ======================================================================== ------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ---------------- Editors: Sylvia Maxwell, Donald Tees, Tim Pozar Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Perriello, Tom Jennings IMPORTANT NOTE: The FidoNet address of the FidoNews BBS has been changed!!! Please make a note of this. "FidoNews" BBS FidoNet 1:1/23 BBS +1-519-570-4176, 300/1200/2400/14200/V.32bis/HST(DS) Internet addresses: Don & Sylvia (submission address) editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com (Postal Service mailing address) (have extreme patience) FidoNews 172 Duke St. E. Kitchener, Ontario Canada N2H 1A7 Published weekly by and for the members of the FidoNet international amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews. Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is copyright 1993 Sylvia Maxwell. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or FidoNews (we're easy). OBTAINING COPIES: The-most-recent-issue-ONLY of FidoNews in electronic form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet. PRINTED COPIES may be obtained from Fido Software for $10.00US each PostPaid First Class within North America, or $13.00US elsewhere, mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.) BACK ISSUES: Available from FidoNet nodes 1:102/138, 1:216/21, 1:125/1212, (and probably others), via filerequest or download FidoNews 10-21 Page: 21 24 May 1993 (consult a recent nodelist for phone numbers). A very nice index to the Tables of Contents to all FidoNews volumes can be filerequested from 1:396/1 or 1:216/21. The name(s) to request are FNEWSxTC.ZIP, where 'x' is the volume number; 1=1984, 2=1985... through 8=1991. INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.ieee.org, in directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you have questions regarding FidoNet, please direct them to deitch@gisatl.fidonet.org, not the FidoNews BBS. (Be kind and patient; David Deitch is generously volunteering to handle FidoNet/Internet questions.) SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable from 1:1/23 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". Please read it. "Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered trademarks of Tom Jennings, and are used with permission. Asked what he thought of Western civilization, M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea". -- END ----------------------------------------------------------------------