A New TransAtlantic Cable System

Frank A. Coluccio frank at fttx.org
Sat Oct 2 17:09:39 CDT 2010

   Hi All.
   It appears we're discussing theoretical limits of silica-based glass
   here. The Press Release assertion talks about what a trader might
   experience. Hm. I would ask Rob Beck to clarify this point and inform
   whether the stated objective in the release accounts for the many o-e
   and e-o conversions on the overland part of the end-to-end trader
   connection, including the handoffs that occur in the NY and London
   metros.  I  know that terrestrially, i.e., here in the US, some
   brokerage firms and large banks (is there any longer a distinction
   between those two today?:) have used their clout to secure links that
   are virtually entirely optical in nature on routes that are under a
   thousand miles, but this is not an option on a submarine system
   that's intrinsically populated with electronics, never mind the tail
   sections that assume multiple service providers getting into the act.
   Rob? Anyone?
   --- Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
   From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
   To: Heath Jones <hj1980 at gmail.com>
   Cc: nanog at nanog.org
   Subject: Re: A New TransAtlantic Cable System
   Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 10:08:50 -0400
   On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 15:01:25 BST, Heath Jones said:
   > >
   > Sales spam - but still - very close to minimum possible latency!
   >  3471 miles @ 186,282 miles/s * 1.5 in glass * 2 round trip =
   My first thought is that they've found a way to cheat on the 1.5. If
   you can
   make it work at 1.4, you get down to 52.2ms - but get it *too* low
   and all
   your photons leak out the sides.  Hmm.. Unless you have a magic core
   runs at 1.1 and a *cladding* that's up around 2.0?

More information about the NANOG mailing list