raging bulls

Wed Aug 8 14:04:18 UTC 2012

There should be some sorts of way to authenticate a GPS timestamp.  GPS
may not be able to do it today but a satellite network could in theory
cryptographically sign a time stamp so that is can only be decrypted by
the receiver at the market data center.  Either that or some kind of
ground based hardware device that syncs with a satellite and generates a
key stream so that the receiver can tell when something happened by
where the device is in the stream.  I am thinking of something along the
lines of SecureID where the keys change every so often, I would just
have to be lots faster.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Chu, Yi [NTK] [mailto:Yi.Chu at sprint.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 9:01 AM
To: Naslund, Steve; nanog at nanog.org
Subject: RE: raging bulls

What prevents someone to fake an earlier timestamp?  Money can bend
light, sure can a few msec.

yi

-----Original Message-----
From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:SNaslund at medline.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 9:53 AM
To: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: RE: raging bulls

It seems to me that all the markets have been doing this the wrong way.
Would it now be more fair to use some kind of signed timestamp and
process all transactions in the order that they originated?  Perhaps
each trade could have a signed GPS tag with the absolute time on it. It
would keep everyone's trades in order no matter how latent their
connection to the market was.  All you would have to do is introduce a
couple of seconds delay to account for the longest circuit and then take
them in order.  They could certainly use less expensive connections and
ensure that international traders get a fair shake.

Steven Naslund

-----Original Message-----
From: Eugen Leitl [mailto:eugen at leitl.org]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 2:02 AM
To: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: raging bulls

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 05:15:51PM -1000, Michael Painter wrote:
> Eugen Leitl wrote:
>> http://www.wired.com/business/2012/08/ff_wallstreet_trading/all/
>>
>> Some interesting, network-relevant content there (but for the 
>> neutrino and drone rubbish).
>
> 'Rubbish' might be a pretty strong word when you're talking about the
players in this space.

If you want to shave off ms, using a source that takes at least minutes
to accrue enough signal for a single bit is definitely not what you
want. And drones across the Atlantic is way too Rube Goldbergesque to
contemplate.

> My favorite from the article:
> "But perhaps not even Einstein fully appreciated the degree to which 
> electromagnetic waves bend in the presence of money. "

Maybe they should invest into a dense, a really low LEO sat
constellation, and go by way of LoS laser.

________________________________

This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel proprietary information intended
for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and
delete all copies of the message.