I was asked to introduce and moderate this evening session with Vint Cerf in Singapore jointly organized by The Digital Movement and IDA.
I didn’t take much notes but I managed to twitter a bit here and there during the session.
Vint Cerf is a great speaker and therefore really needs very little moderating nor prompting. On the other hand, I find myself fumbling quite a bit…looks like I am getting rusty at public speaking and presentation. But hey, the star of the show is Vint and he definitely took it!
Okay enough fun for the evening and time to pack my stuff. I am going sailing for the next couple of days to Tioman, hopefully coming back alive. Wish me luck!
The current (jan 1st, 2007) figure for 2005 is 175.52 million addresses. Together with adjustments for earlier years, this brings the total addresses available to almost exactly 1.3 billion, down from 1468.61 million a year ago. This is out of 3706.65 million usable IPv4 addresses, so 2407.11 million addresses are currently given out to either end-users or Internet Service Providers.
Lets also put a stop the myth that “MIT has more IP addresses of whole of China”, something that is no longer true for a couple of years. Yet sadly, some still chant it, as recently as a couple of weeks ago by a NUS lecturer that I immediately put a stop to.
China is the 4th largest IP holder now after US, JP and EU.
Just learn that FCC is going to issue a Notice of Inquire on Network Neutrality from (via Kevin Werbach). Went digging around at FCC site but couldnt find any yet and definitely not on the FCC open forum.
Kevin said, “I actually think the FCC would be the better place to address Net Neutrality issues, but I’m skeptical this proceeding will go anywhere with the current FCC leadership.”
Like Kevin, I am skeptical with the current FCC leadership under Kevin Martin. I am also not certain Congress will do a better job either especially Congressional Election is a few weeks away.
It would be an interesting excerise to dig through the congressional electrion donations and see which companies have donated to who however.
I just found a Youtube clone in in China called 6rooms. It is so damn close that I thought it is Youtube the first time I saw it on Chinese blog until I saw the URL. In fact, after using it for a while, I think it is even better than Youtube!
Love what they did using AJAX on the site! It has all the Web 2.0 elements, AJAX, tags, Blog friendly, etc etc. Very cool!
I am going to have fun surfing the sites looking for Chinese clips.
Check out this movie preview made by a batch of 14 years olds. The power of creativity and technology :-)
Okay, Cruise Missile is definitely out of my league :)
Anyway, this Internet2 trip for me is all about routing: How network A connect to network B when there are multiple paths, one shorter latency and another bigger pipe and unfortunately not both at the same time, and how applications deal with it. Most just give up and say MPLS which is okay but in a longer term, how do we build a network that can route packets based on different application requirements.
Of course, lets not ignore the politics of it. For example, SingAREN has multiple possible paths to APAN-JP, one direct 155mbps, another indirect 622mbps via TEIN2-SG POP, and yet another 622mbps to Taiwan then 622mbps to 622mbps to APAN-JP. Logically, the preference route would be direct, then 622mbps via TEIN2 and lastly via Taiwan. Yet somehow, we end up preferring Taiwan as a secondary route over TEIN2-SG POP.
Went over to Reston to attend the Digital City Expo. Vint Cerf was the keynote speaker :)
I am surprised to see so many city government officials, mostly for their fact finding trip to deploy their own muni-wireless. The driver for deploying the muni-wireless however is very different compared to metro-wireless or those deployed in Asia. Metro is mostly serving the mobile professionals (who already have internet access at home) while they are in the city while those in Asia are for alternative access and somewhat political. Muni-wireless however has a different set of drivers: getting broadband to the community to preserve jobs, increase revenue (partial due to lose of tax revenue due to VoIP), no ISPs or poor/expensive Internet access, community needs etc. Most of these cities also migrate their existing AMR onto the wireless network (e.g. equip’ing police cars with laptops). And best of all, the return on investments are very appealing.
The obvious questions on whether city governments should compete with private companies in providing Internet services. And quoting Vint Cerf, “It is not penal”. :-)