Cisco Feeling Spunky, Wants to Change the Internet
Cisco Feeling Spunky, Wants to Change the Internet
Posted 03/10/2010 at 5:25am
| by Paul Lilly
8
Comments
Print
Networking specialist Cisco on Tuesday announced what it claims is a "major advancement in Internet networking" in its CRS-3 Carrier Routing System (CRS).
"With more than 12 times the traffic capacity of the nearest competing system, the Cisco CRS-3 is designed to transform the broadband communication and entertainment industry by accelerating the delivery of compelling new experiences for consumers, new revenue opportunities for service providers, and new ways to collaborate in the workplace," Cisco said.
Sound pretty ambitious, and Cisco has the numbers to match. The CRS-3 delivers up to 322Tbps (that's Terabits per second), which Cisco says is enough to enable the entire printed collection of the Library of Congress to be downloaded in just over one second. It's also more than triple the capacity of the 92Tbps CRS-1, and 12 times the capacity of any other core router in the industry.
"The next generation Internet is upon us and we are confident that the Cisco CRS-3 will play a crucial role as service providers like AT&T deliver an exciting, new array of video, mobile, data center, and cloud services," said Pankaj Patel, senior VP and GM, Service Provider Business, Cisco.
More like this
nadako
March 10, 2010 at 2:19pm
I really dont care about how fast it is but just thinking about how much better the latency will be tickles me to death. For us gamers a 300kBS speed and yes i do mean that in other words 1.5Mbps is plenty to run a game online but the latency is the thing that will hang us up and slow down game performance. This should help out us gamers a great deal. Oh and comcast will probly always have the CAP. We are paying for 16Mbps and right now we are only hitting around 5 to 6Mbps that is just horable.
urdead4g
March 10, 2010 at 6:44am
None of if freckin matters if we're getting screwed over by providers enforcing too small of a cap such as 60GB. This really has an impact on our streaming limitations.
Nyarlathotep
March 10, 2010 at 12:13pm
Look at it this way. If the ISP's introduced caps because serious downloaders consume too much bandwidth then expanding badwidth should allow them to lift the caps. Unfotunately if an ISP recognizes a significant increase in profits from people exceeding the caps they will probably never go away, even with unlimited bandwidth.
Additionally, as a society we are implementing so many new devices that all tie into the internet. I'd rather see some hardware put in place preemptively to keep us from hitting the backbone's limit than hitting that wall and struggling to react.
"Sheesh, It's just one man's opinion..." -Me
Digital-Storm
March 10, 2010 at 7:22am
I'm not being capped, but it doesn't matter if network providers in the USA screw over everyone and give slow connections compaired ot the rest of the world.
Caboose
March 10, 2010 at 8:00am
*zooms along on a 15Mb connection that doesn't cost a small fortune*
Up here in Canada, we seem to be doin' pretty good eh! Take off ya hoser
-= I don't want to be dead, I want to be alive! Or... a cowboy! =-
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
We introduce Intel's latest class of tablet killers and review 4 of the first Ultra...
Where have all the memorable videogame enemies gone?
This month's issue
Feature
11 Hardware Hacks
Feature
Overclock Your CPU
How-To
Supercharge Your Smartphone
Build It
A Powerful $830 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Multi-Monitor Usage On The Rise http://t.co/eWfJfCEG8 hours 41 min ago
- maximumpc: Windows 8 Consumer Preview Coming On February 29 http://t.co/3Nd04FdR14 hours 29 min ago
- maximumpc: Can RIM *ever* catch a break? Not today! App World numbers not as great as previously reported http://t.co/3ERRhr311 day 10 hours ago
