$1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/122989-1-5-billion-the-cost-of-cutting-lo... $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms By Sebastian Anthony on March 20, 2012 at 1:04 pm Arctic Link submarine cable Starting this summer, a convoy of ice breakers and specially-adapted polar ice-rated cable laying ships will begin to lay the first ever trans-Arctic Ocean submarine fiber optic cables. Two of these cables, called Artic Fibre and Arctic Link, will cross the Northwest Passage which runs through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. A third cable, the Russian Optical Trans-Arctic Submarine Cable System (ROTACS), will skirt the north coast of Scandinavia and Russia. All three cables will connect the United Kingdom to Japan, with a smattering of branches that will provide high-speed internet access to a handful of Arctic Circle communities. The completed cables are estimated to cost between $600 million and $1.5 billion each. All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run: Currently, packets from the UK to Japan either have to traverse Europe, the Middle East, and the Indian Ocean, or the Atlantic, US, and Pacific, both routes racking up around 15,000 miles in the process. It’s only 10,000 miles (16,000km) across the Arctic Ocean, and you don’t have to mess around with any land crossings, either. Russian Optical Trans-Arctic Submarine Cable System (ROTACS) between UK and JapanThe massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. It is for this reason that a new cable is currently being laid between the UK and US — it will cost $300 million and shave “just” six milliseconds off the fastest link currently available. The lower latency will also be a boon to other technologies that hinge heavily on the internet, such as telemedicine (and teleconferencing) and education. Telephone calls and live news coverage would also enjoy the significantly lower latency. Each of the fiber optic cables will have a capacity in the terabits-per-second range, which will probably come in handy too. Beyond the stock markets, though, the main advantage of the three new cables is added redundancy. Currently, almost every cable that lands in Asia goes through a choke point in the Middle East or the Luzon Strait between the Philippine and South China seas. If a ship were to drag an anchor across the wrong patch of seabed, billions of people could wake up to find themselves either completely disconnected from the internet or surfing with dial-up-like speeds. The three new cables will all come down from the north of Japan, through the relatively-empty Bering Sea — and the Arctic Ocean, where each of the cables will run for more than 5,000 miles, is one of the least-trafficked parts of the world. That said, the cables will still have to be laid hundreds of meters below the surface to avoid the tails of roving icebergs. The ROTACS cable path Each cable will be laid by a pair of ships: an ice breaker that leads the way, and a cable ship. Until now it has been impossible to lay cables in the Arctic Ocean, but the retreat of the Arctic sea ice means that the Northwest Passage is now generally ice-free from August to October; a big enough window that cable can be laid fairly safely. Existing cable ships (and there aren’t many of them) are all outfitted for balmier climes, so all three cables will require the use of a polar ice-rated ship that has been retrofitted to carry cable-laying gear. Read more about the secret world of submarine cables. For more information on the Russian Optical Trans-Arctic Submarine Cable System (ROTACS), check out the Polarnet Project (machine translated). The Arctic Fibre and Arctic Link websites have information on the North American cables. [Image credit: New Scientist]
Yeah this is super cool! I hope ISPs will peer well once cable is ready! (Sent from my mobile device) Anurag Bhatia http://anuragbhatia.com On Mar 23, 2012 5:24 PM, "Eugen Leitl" <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/122989-1-5-billion-the-cost-of-cutting-lo...
$1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
By Sebastian Anthony on March 20, 2012 at 1:04 pm
Arctic Link submarine cable
Starting this summer, a convoy of ice breakers and specially-adapted polar ice-rated cable laying ships will begin to lay the first ever trans-Arctic Ocean submarine fiber optic cables. Two of these cables, called Artic Fibre and Arctic Link, will cross the Northwest Passage which runs through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. A third cable, the Russian Optical Trans-Arctic Submarine Cable System (ROTACS), will skirt the north coast of Scandinavia and Russia. All three cables will connect the United Kingdom to Japan, with a smattering of branches that will provide high-speed internet access to a handful of Arctic Circle communities. The completed cables are estimated to cost between $600 million and $1.5 billion each.
All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run: Currently, packets from the UK to Japan either have to traverse Europe, the Middle East, and the Indian Ocean, or the Atlantic, US, and Pacific, both routes racking up around 15,000 miles in the process. It’s only 10,000 miles (16,000km) across the Arctic Ocean, and you don’t have to mess around with any land crossings, either.
Russian Optical Trans-Arctic Submarine Cable System (ROTACS) between UK and JapanThe massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. It is for this reason that a new cable is currently being laid between the UK and US — it will cost $300 million and shave “just” six milliseconds off the fastest link currently available. The lower latency will also be a boon to other technologies that hinge heavily on the internet, such as telemedicine (and teleconferencing) and education. Telephone calls and live news coverage would also enjoy the significantly lower latency. Each of the fiber optic cables will have a capacity in the terabits-per-second range, which will probably come in handy too.
Beyond the stock markets, though, the main advantage of the three new cables is added redundancy. Currently, almost every cable that lands in Asia goes through a choke point in the Middle East or the Luzon Strait between the Philippine and South China seas. If a ship were to drag an anchor across the wrong patch of seabed, billions of people could wake up to find themselves either completely disconnected from the internet or surfing with dial-up-like speeds. The three new cables will all come down from the north of Japan, through the relatively-empty Bering Sea — and the Arctic Ocean, where each of the cables will run for more than 5,000 miles, is one of the least-trafficked parts of the world. That said, the cables will still have to be laid hundreds of meters below the surface to avoid the tails of roving icebergs.
The ROTACS cable path
Each cable will be laid by a pair of ships: an ice breaker that leads the way, and a cable ship. Until now it has been impossible to lay cables in the Arctic Ocean, but the retreat of the Arctic sea ice means that the Northwest Passage is now generally ice-free from August to October; a big enough window that cable can be laid fairly safely. Existing cable ships (and there aren’t many of them) are all outfitted for balmier climes, so all three cables will require the use of a polar ice-rated ship that has been retrofitted to carry cable-laying gear.
Read more about the secret world of submarine cables.
For more information on the Russian Optical Trans-Arctic Submarine Cable System (ROTACS), check out the Polarnet Project (machine translated).
The Arctic Fibre and Arctic Link websites have information on the North American cables.
[Image credit: New Scientist]
On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run:
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km. Aled
That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :) adam -----Original Message----- From: Aled Morris [mailto:aledm@qix.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 1:31 PM To: Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run:
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km. Aled
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Regnauld" <regnauld@nsrc.org>
Subject: Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms Vitkovsky, Adam (avitkovsky) writes:
Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :)
You know the shipping cost on a 2 light year thick lead SFP ?
Ah... *here's* the Whacky Weekend thread. I was wondering where it was. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
-----Original Message----- From: Vitkovsky, Adam [mailto:avitkovsky@emea.att.com] Sent: 23 March 2012 12:57 To: Aled Morris; Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved
So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec
Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :)
adam
Nooo, we just need Interocitors! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interocitor --- Leigh ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________
Or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansible That's what came to my mind when I first heard about quantum entanglement just to learn that there's really small chance we could ever use it for communication adam -----Original Message----- From: Leigh Porter [mailto:leigh.porter@ukbroadband.com] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 2:20 PM To: Vitkovsky, Adam; Aled Morris; Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
-----Original Message----- From: Vitkovsky, Adam [mailto:avitkovsky@emea.att.com] Sent: 23 March 2012 12:57 To: Aled Morris; Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: RE: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved
So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec
Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :)
adam
Nooo, we just need Interocitors! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interocitor --- Leigh ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Vitkovsky, Adam <avitkovsky@emea.att.com> wrote:
That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved
So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec
I bet for $ 1.5 billion neutrino communication (anywhere on Earth) to its antipode in about 40 msec one way) could be developed (i.e., the bit rate improved), and I could see some real market advantages to anyone who had access to it, even at 100 kbps type bit rates. Given that, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some physicists and networking people quietly being hired away by an obscure new venture... Regards Marshall
Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :)
adam
-----Original Message----- From: Aled Morris [mailto:aledm@qix.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 1:31 PM To: Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run:
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km.
Aled
The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot. There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos. On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Marshall Eubanks <marshall.eubanks@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Vitkovsky, Adam <avitkovsky@emea.att.com> wrote:
That is why there's this neutrinos project It's not faster than the speed of light though it can shoot through the Earth and no cables cost involved
So far the speed is 0.1 bit per sec
I bet for $ 1.5 billion neutrino communication (anywhere on Earth) to its antipode in about 40 msec one way) could be developed (i.e., the bit rate improved), and I could see some real market advantages to anyone who had access to it, even at 100 kbps type bit rates.
Given that, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some physicists and networking people quietly being hired away by an obscure new venture...
Regards Marshall
Can't wait for the neutrino SFPs :)
adam
-----Original Message----- From: Aled Morris [mailto:aledm@qix.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 1:31 PM To: Eugen Leitl Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: $1.5 billion: The cost of cutting London-Tokyo latency by 60ms
On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run:
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km.
Aled
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:16:59 -0700, George Herbert said:
The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot.
There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos.
Note that each pulse was probably millions or even billions of neutrinos, so the detection rate was even worse than you'd think. I saw a statistic that every second, 50 trillion neutrinos pass through your body. And the number that will interact is well into the single digits.
You guys joke but here is n little article from last week on the current state of Neutrino communications: http://www.economist.com/node/21550242 "The neutrinos themselves are created by smashing bunches of protons into a target made of graphite. They are detected roughly 1km away by researchers [..] . By modulating the pulses of protons the group was able to send a message in binary that, when translated, read “neutrino”. " -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
From the abstract: "The link achieved a decoded data rate of 0.1 bits/sec with a bit error rate of 1% over a distance of 1.035 km, including 240 m of earth."
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.2847v1.pdf For practical communications, at longer distances, you probably lose beam intensity as a 1/R^2 function (the neutrino beam isn't precisely collimated), so 1,000 km away it will be 1 millionth as strong, or 0.0000001 baud, 1 bit per 115.74 days. At 2,000 km it would be less than 1 bit per year. Sure you want to do this? 8-) On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Simon Lyall <simon@darkmere.gen.nz> wrote:
You guys joke but here is n little article from last week on the current state of Neutrino communications:
http://www.economist.com/node/21550242
"The neutrinos themselves are created by smashing bunches of protons into a target made of graphite. They are detected roughly 1km away by researchers [..] . By modulating the pulses of protons the group was able to send a message in binary that, when translated, read “neutrino”. "
-- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:14 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:16:59 -0700, George Herbert said:
The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot.
There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos.
Note that each pulse was probably millions or even billions of neutrinos, so the detection rate was even worse than you'd think. I saw a statistic that every second, 50 trillion neutrinos pass through your body. And the number that will interact is well into the single digits.
Small detection numbers are not, per se, fatal to communication. What fraction of the photons generated by a GPS satellite are captured by your phone? The neutrino interaction rate increases with neutrino energy, and sea water makes a good neutrino detector. You could, for a billion dollars, do a LOT better than they did. By the way, here is the original paper : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.2847v1.pdf Regards Marshall
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Marshall Eubanks <marshall.eubanks@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:14 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:16:59 -0700, George Herbert said:
The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot.
There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos.
Note that each pulse was probably millions or even billions of neutrinos, so the detection rate was even worse than you'd think. I saw a statistic that every second, 50 trillion neutrinos pass through your body. And the number that will interact is well into the single digits.
Small detection numbers are not, per se, fatal to communication. What fraction of the photons generated by a GPS satellite are captured by your phone?
Much higher fraction than with neutrinos. Remember their MFPs are measured in light-years...
The neutrino interaction rate increases with neutrino energy, and sea water makes a good neutrino detector. You could, for a billion dollars, do a LOT better than they did.
On the detector end, sure. On the transmitter end, it's just not a well collimated beam due to physics, and no matter how hard you try the generation of neutrinos is a low-efficiency process.
By the way, here is the original paper : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.2847v1.pdf
Yep. I meant to include the URL but forgot. -- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:51 AM, George Herbert <george.herbert@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Marshall Eubanks <marshall.eubanks@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:14 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:16:59 -0700, George Herbert said:
The physics is not conducive to improving the situation a lot.
There's probably $1.5 billion in the ground already in neutrino detectors; the total combined detector bit rate is pretty poor. One experiment looking at neutrinos coming off the Fermilab accelerator had 473 million accelerator pulses with under 1.1 million detected neutrinos.
Note that each pulse was probably millions or even billions of neutrinos, so the detection rate was even worse than you'd think. I saw a statistic that every second, 50 trillion neutrinos pass through your body. And the number that will interact is well into the single digits.
Small detection numbers are not, per se, fatal to communication. What fraction of the photons generated by a GPS satellite are captured by your phone?
Much higher fraction than with neutrinos. Remember their MFPs are measured in light-years...
Actually, at the energy they used it's more like 0.1 light seconds.
The neutrino interaction rate increases with neutrino energy, and sea water makes a good neutrino detector. You could, for a billion dollars, do a LOT better than they did.
On the detector end, sure. On the transmitter end, it's just not a well collimated beam due to physics, and no matter how hard you try the generation of neutrinos is a low-efficiency process.
The beam width was < 2 meters after 1 km, equivalent to ~12 km after 1 Earth radius. The beam can be made tighter by going to higher energy and using more or better post collision focusing magnets. The KM3NeT detector in the Mediterranean will be more sensitive, 3 km across and will cost order 200 million euros. With better magnets, the existing beam could be made to be the size of that detector at 1 Earth radius. So, existing technology could certainly communicate across the Atlantic or the Pacific. The real question, again, would be what it would take to get the bit rate up. Regards Marshall
By the way, here is the original paper : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.2847v1.pdf
Yep. I meant to include the URL but forgot.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
What about those -- I assume successful -- experiments to fire neutrinos straight through the earth as a communications medium? Not sure what the bandwidth of a neutrino stream is. On March 23, 2012 at 12:31 aledm@qix.co.uk (Aled Morris) wrote:
On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run:
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km.
Aled
-- -Barry Shein The World | bzs@TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km.
Aled
I suggested this once when it was decided that the latency from California to the UK was too high and that I should reduce it. The company wouldn't go for it, though. G
On 3/24/12 01:32 , George Bonser wrote:
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km.
Current record depth of a borehole is under 12,500 meters which is a bit short of the goal.
Aled
I suggested this once when it was decided that the latency from California to the UK was too high and that I should reduce it. The company wouldn't go for it, though.
Bandwidth delay product has undone many a well laid plan.
G
Hey $1.5Bn would get you less than half of Spotify right now, so it seems like a good deal. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
On 24/03/2012 00:32, George Bonser wrote:
I suggested this once when it was decided that the latency from California to the UK was too high and that I should reduce it. The company wouldn't go for it, though.
I assume they had a practical alternative to your proposition? Perhaps making light go faster? Nick
On 23 March 2012 13:31, Aled Morris <aledm@qix.co.uk> wrote:
On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed. As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this by 30% to 170ms. This speed-up will be gained by virtue of a much shorter run:
If they could armor the cable sufficiently perhaps they could drill the straigh line path through the Earth's crust (mantle and outer core) and do London-Tokyo in less than 10,000km.
Aled
I imagine a easier solution. Use a random number generator in both sides, with the same seed. Then use a slower way to send "packets re-sync" that will contain the delta from the generated number, to the real actual number. I suppose this speeds are needed for some "fast speed transaction", that are leeching money from the background noise on the market. This is not like the Roman empire, where you could make a lot of money buying wheat wen theres a dry year in egypt. note: I could be wrong. -- -- ℱin del ℳensaje.
Tei <oscar.vives@gmail.com> wrote on 03/26/2012 06:16:53 AM:
I imagine a easier solution. Use a random number generator in both sides, with the same seed. Then use a slower way to send "packets re-sync" that will contain the delta from the generated number, to the real actual number.
I suppose this speeds are needed for some "fast speed transaction", that are leeching money from the background noise on the market.
This is not like the Roman empire, where you could make a lot of money buying wheat wen theres a dry year in egypt.
note: I could be wrong.
Noted. Joe
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:16:53 +0200, Tei said:
I imagine a easier solution. Use a random number generator in both sides, with the same seed. Then use a slower way to send "packets re-sync" that will contain the delta from the generated number, to the real actual number.
Congrats. You've just re-invented the crytpo method called "xor with a pseudorandom bitstream". And no, it doesn't minimize your round-trip latency at all.
I suppose this speeds are needed for some "fast speed transaction", that are leeching money from the background noise on the market.
Unfortunately, you are correct on that point.
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:53:45 +0100, Eugen Leitl said:
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/122989-1-5-billion-the-cost-of-cutting-lo...
Lower latency is good...
The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars.
But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well.
On 3/23/12 14:47 , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:53:45 +0100, Eugen Leitl said:
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/122989-1-5-billion-the-cost-of-cutting-lo...
Lower latency is good...
The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars.
But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well.
Notwithstanding how bad an idea high speed trading from the vantage point of those who don't participate in it, 60ms would place you at a competitive disadvantage to traders that are collocated at or near the exchange, such that if you're engaged in an arbitrage activity between two markets someone can frontrun your front-running.
On 23/03/2012 15:16, Joel jaeggli wrote:
Notwithstanding how bad an idea high speed trading from the vantage point of those who don't participate in it, 60ms would place you at a competitive disadvantage to traders that are collocated at or near the exchange, such that if you're engaged in an arbitrage activity between two markets someone can frontrun your front-running.
I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october. Nick
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 23/03/2012 15:16, Joel jaeggli wrote:
Notwithstanding how bad an idea high speed trading from the vantage point of those who don't participate in it, 60ms would place you at a competitive disadvantage to traders that are collocated at or near the exchange, such that if you're engaged in an arbitrage activity between two markets someone can frontrun your front-running.
I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october.
hopefully it's harder to drag an anchor then ... so it won't happen? :)
I'd be quite interested in seeing the MTTR for a sub-ice cable break which happened in late october.
Nick
Well, you won't have to worry about people dragging anchor across the cable. Other than earthquake or volcanic eruption, I can't imagine what would damage a cable that time of year in that location. It would be interesting if they put some sensors on those cables to monitor ocean salinity and temperature at those depths, too.
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars.
But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well.
The average consumer gets a 15 minute artificial delay in trading, why not implement for all trades... -- Earthquake Magnitude: 4.8 Date: Friday, March 23, 2012 14:35:31 UTC Location: Tonga Latitude: -16.2478; Longitude: -174.0706 Depth: 119.50 km
Jeroen van Aart <jeroen@mompl.net> wrote:
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars.
But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well.
The average consumer gets a 15 minute artificial delay in trading, why not implement for all trades...
Virtually any consumer can get true real-time trading data if they're willing to pay some relatively modest fees for that access -- Last I knew, the most expensive 'real-time' fee charged by any exchange was under $200/mo. For everything traded on that exchange. For anybody doing short-term, 'tactical', trading, that is a "petty cash" expense. Imposing the 15-minute delay on 'everybody', would simply give the 'floor traders' the -exclusive' edge on those trading strategies.
On 3/23/12 19:45 , Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars.
But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well.
The average consumer gets a 15 minute artificial delay in trading, why
in data, not trading... and that really only applies to the sort of free feeds you're getting. Even the average consumer gets their ecn cleared market order filled in seconds inclusive of order entry.
not implement for all trades...
On Mar 23, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Jeroen van Aart <jeroen@mompl.net> wrote:
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose) millions of dollars. But it should be illegal to run a stock market that volatile. This can't end well.
The average consumer gets a 15 minute artificial delay in trading, why not implement for all trades...
The average consumer shouldn't be day trading with shit market data thats delayed or worse with level 1 depth of the markets they're just asking to be taken by the heavy quant firms. HIgh frequency trading does provide a service to the financial markets as a whole despite what the media and government politicians will have you think. Transaction cost has plummeted over the years and do has the barrister to enter the markets.
-- Earthquake Magnitude: 4.8 Date: Friday, March 23, 2012 14:35:31 UTC Location: Tonga Latitude: -16.2478; Longitude: -174.0706 Depth: 119.50 km
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:59:34 -0400, Rodrick Brown said:
HIgh frequency trading does provide a service to the financial markets as a whole despite what the media and government politicians will have you think.
OK, I'll bite. What benefit does the market *as a whole* get from the ability to do trades in 60ms rather than 120ms? (Hint - the fact you can extract money via more arbitrage transactions per minute is a benefit to the trader, not the market as a whole - if you extract $100M from the market, it came from somewhere....)
On Mar 26, 2012, at 9:32 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:59:34 -0400, Rodrick Brown said:
HIgh frequency trading does provide a service to the financial markets as a whole despite what the media and government politicians will have you think.
OK, I'll bite. What benefit does the market *as a whole* get from the ability to do trades in 60ms rather than 120ms? (Hint - the fact you can extract money via more arbitrage transactions per minute is a benefit to the trader, not the market as a whole - if you extract $100M from the market, it came from somewhere....)
In its core very liquid markets and market efficiency. The faster a trade executes is the faster the market can recover and self correct themselves from trading mishaps. Faster speeds has provided higher volume of shares traded which has directly lead to higher profits, higher tax income for governments, and the less likely-hood of being front-run by dishonest brokers and most of all lower transaction cost for the average market precipitant. HFT like anything else in the modern world is prime for abuse for anyone looking to manipulate the markets by taking advantage of certain rules or loopholes that legislation has not yet discovered or plugged. That being said I strongly believe high speed trading has done more good than bad for the financial markets as a whole. Lowering access time to the markets will only open up a new can of worms which will easily be circumvented by other loopholes and abused by those with the know how! Sorry for the off topic rant!
participants (23)
-
Aled Morris -
Anurag Bhatia -
Barry Shein -
Christopher Morrow -
Eugen Leitl -
George Bonser -
George Herbert -
Jay Ashworth -
Jeroen van Aart -
Joe Loiacono -
Joel jaeggli -
Joly MacFie -
Leigh Porter -
Marshall Eubanks -
Nick Hilliard -
Paul Rolland -
Phil Regnauld -
Robert Bonomi -
Rodrick Brown -
Simon Lyall -
Tei -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu -
Vitkovsky, Adam