Hot Day (Oct 02 2012) |
![]() |
| log in |
Message boards : Technical News : Hot Day (Oct 02 2012)
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Matt, | |
| ID: 1290993 · | |
|
Uploads now working fine, BUT, now cannot report or request new work. | |
| ID: 1291012 · | |
|
Scheduler timeout and no work available.... | |
| ID: 1291116 · | |
|
Hi guys - | |
| ID: 1291514 · | |
|
Matt - | |
| ID: 1291681 · | |
|
Hi Matt, | |
| ID: 1291854 · | |
|
This may have been asked before, but why was the Hurricane Electric 1Gbit/sec line terminated down on the campus, instead of in the SSL, in the first place? | |
| ID: 1291932 · | |
This may have been asked before, but why was the Hurricane Electric 1Gbit/sec line terminated down on the campus, instead of in the SSL, in the first place? Hurricane Electric is the Internet Service Provider, not hardware. The plan allows up to 1GB data rates at an annual cost of $12000 IIRC. Getting the data to PAIX so it can connect to H.E. is a separate issue. Joe | |
| ID: 1292073 · | |
This may have been asked before, but why was the Hurricane Electric 1Gbit/sec line terminated down on the campus, instead of in the SSL, in the first place? My question was: why is it down on campus, and not at the SSL? I know it's an ISP... another way of saying this is: Why does SETI need to use the 100Mbs line down to the campus, when the ISP's termination should have been on the hill all along? ____________ . | |
| ID: 1292121 · | |
|
I think you'll find the answer to be "University politics". And there is nothing logical about them. | |
| ID: 1292140 · | |
My question was: why is it down on campus, and not at the SSL? I know it's an ISP... another way of saying this is: Why does SETI need to use the 100Mbs line down to the campus, when the ISP's termination should have been on the hill all along? The end of HE connection is actually in a building in Palo Alto, across the San Francisco bay from the campus. Seti uses the Campus ISP to get the data from there into the campus IT building. If you check the router pages you will see there is more than one link between the campus and Palo Alto. As to the ISP link being at the SSL, well, Campus is the Landlord and you would need the permission of the Landlord to string any cable across his property. Also the ISP might want to be paid to string that cable. Giga connectivity isn't going to run on any existing cable. So we could be talking about stringing a undersea cable from Palo Alto to Berkeley. I suspect that might run into some dollars. Or perhaps they might be able to get permission to string a cable on the Bay Bridge from CalTrans. In any case this isn't something that can be a jury rig. So this is out. Campus may be being charged by their ISP based on the total data on their link. Allowing SETI to go full bandwidth would change that charge. Obviously in this era of Government funding cutbacks, that would have to be run by the Board of Regents. I doubt they would agree to it unless they were paid back by SETI. As you know SETI is rather short of funds right now. Frankly I'd much rather see work on Ntpckr than bigger bandwidth with the limited resources available. ____________ | |
| ID: 1292422 · | |
Now the UL are the problem, they take a long time to start then actualy goes fast, after that stuck at 100%, after some long time return with and error. Try this in your cc_config.xml: <cc_config> <options> <http_transfer_timeout>3000</http_transfer_timeout> </options> </cc_config> ____________ BOINC WIKI | |
| ID: 1292658 · | |
Frankly I'd much rather see work on Ntpckr than bigger bandwidth with the limited resources available. And i'd rather they sort out the bandwidth issue. Here we are, most caches should be pretty much full, sod all shorites in the system, no AP going out, and still the network traffic is maxed out. ____________ Grant Darwin NT. | |
| ID: 1292728 · | |
Frankly I'd much rather see work on Ntpckr than bigger bandwidth with the limited resources available. Last time I talked with Jeff he mentioned that NTPCKR and RFI are almost always running however that doesn't typically show up on the server status page. ____________ Executive Director GPU Users Group Inc. - brad@gpuug.org | |
| ID: 1292882 · | |
|
Is hurricane electronic the only provider option ? | |
| ID: 1292933 · | |
Is hurricane electronic the only provider option ? Probabily the wireless link will be to slow for the high demand of SETI but a couple of fast ADSL links will do the same work and sure will cost a fraction of that and requires no aditional wiring. ____________ | |
| ID: 1292938 · | |
|
Juan wrote: Probabily the wireless link will be to slow for the high demand of SETI To be more specific, a dedicated wireless link(or multiple links) , as in not on an independent provider. example HE.net termination to wireless link to wireless receiver at SSL building ... possibly one or two repeaters in-line. | |
| ID: 1292951 · | |
|
You would still need permission from the Regent of Berkeley to put up the repeaters, and likely the permission to use part of the wireless spectrum as such distances. | |
| ID: 1292952 · | |
You would still need permission from the Regent of Berkeley to put up the repeaters, and likely the permission to use part of the wireless spectrum as such distances. As a licensed HAM radio operator, I transmit minor amounts of data quite often with out any issue at all, over extraordinary distances, with the help of other HAM ops who act as repeaters. The use of the wireless spectrum would be dictated by the FCC for mid-range data transmission. latency is a hardware/load problem more common to multi user systems , consider that this system would be dedicated to SAH. And would logically also have a hard wired parity check for the transmitted/recieved data. As for permission to put such a system in place , I can understand the red tape must be overwhelming. but SAH's usage of the campus network would be reduced to a tiny fraction ,as the only need for it would be the parity check I mentioned above. Wouldn't that be enough justification alone ? The antennas would probably be objectionable for cosmetic reasons unless there were already towers in place with space for rent. The hardware requirements might be cost prohibitive as well. Though we've recently proven, with the right people in charge of donations and motivating said donations. This project can really get stuff done. ( /shameless plug for GPU users group < you folks are awesome! ) | |
| ID: 1292966 · | |
|
I do believe the airspace is owned by Berkeley, and such radio transmissions may disrupt other buildings. Therefore I do believe this would still be an issue that needs the permission of the Regents of Berkeley so that it can be cleared whether those concerns are real. | |
| ID: 1292978 · | |
Message boards : Technical News : Hot Day (Oct 02 2012)
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |