Conference 7.286::digital

Nope.  Discussed quite a bit in LJSRV2::INTERNET_TOOLS.

			Steve

I think the answer is no, mostly for security reasons.

I myself dialed into my local internet service provider at 28.8 and
did receive the cybercast.  The real-audio came thru fairly well.
For those of you who have never heard this technology work, it is
akin to listening to a short wave radio, or an AM radio tuned to
a station far away.  I was getting about a 10% loss in data, but
the telecast was still very legible.

In any event, does anyone know how many folks were linked in and
were able to get the rea-audio stuff?

-- cheers,
   Guy

    I heard Palmer say at least 2000 people were on-line, about 5 minutes
    into the cast....
    
    I was one, through MSN/Internet Explorer and I was mighty impressed. 
    Real-Audio sound was excellent and I loved the slide show that was
    coordinated with the live discussion.
    
    I sent a question via EXCHANGE and it was answered in about 5 minutes.
    
    Very cool stuff....
    
    

     I am curious as to the software used on this Cybercast and the
    address of the server.
    
        Ken...........

    Ken,
    
    The software is called RealAudio.  WWW.realaudio.com.
    
    Cheers,
    
    Rick

	Does it strike anyone else as odd that we Digital employees
	were unable to tune into the very Cybercast whose purpose was
	to highlight our nifty Web technology? Why can't we use our 
	own stuff?

	Yes, I've read in the INTERNET_TOOLS notesfile the technical
	reason why Realaudio doesn't work through our firewall.	
	If I were a customer I'd consider it a rather lame excuse.


					John

    By the way, check out the Intellicast weather page for Boston. We've
    started advertising AltaVista, it would seem ...
    
    http://www.intellicast.com/weather/bos/
    
    It also showed up on the New York page.

	Yes, I've read in the INTERNET_TOOLS notesfile the technical
	reason why Realaudio doesn't work through our firewall.	
	If I were a customer I'd consider it a rather lame excuse.
    *
    * Isn't this the same Firewall products we're trying to sell??  Doesn't 
    * make it too attractive when it has this limitations.
    *

RE: .8

>    * Isn't this the same Firewall products we're trying to sell??  Doesn't 
>    * make it too attractive when it has this limitations.

Our firewall products have the *capability* to filter out different types
of information, based on the security considerations put into place by the 
people who own the firewalls.  They do not have the *requirement* to do this 
filtering, ie, you can turn it on or off.

I, as one who has been involved in the sale of firewall products for Digital,
am glad that our products have this capability.  Whether you believe it is
reasonable for Digital management to prohibit one type of information or 
another from passing through the firewalls which protect the Easynet, is a 
completely different discussion.

-- Ken Moreau

Firewall or no firewall a bigger issue with Real-Audio is band-width.
I agree the cool/sexy factor is *very* high but how many businesses
are really going to use this for large numbers of employees? I imagine
this will be like getting first class plane tickets. The VP's and
the big boys may get it but the rest of us will be cooling our heels
for awhile. You have to prove you are important for the fun toys. liesl

    Hmm.  I'm sponge worthy.  I guess.  I'm on the home alone plan and as I
    was working there, I tuned in VIA CYBERCAST!.  I'm sorry to hear that
    those "behind" the firewall were unable to "go on-line", but it was
    broadcast via DVN??
    
    This technology (read-Audio and the ability to flash graphics over the
    web) is one the most astounding marketing potentials I've ever seen.

There are proxy servers available for RealAudio.  Unfortunately, they are
UDP proxies and there are serious concerns around opening a hole in a 
firewall for a connectionless process.  I wouldn't be too quick to condemn
Digital for not allowing RealAudio.  I think you'll find that many other
security-conscious companies are like-minded.

j.

    Who needs RealAudio anyway ....when you can rely on DVN to see it live.
    Unless, of course, you happen to live in the lower forgotten half of
    this planet (ie the SOUTHERN hemisphere) where DVN arrives on VHS about
    a week after the products are sold off to another company :(
    
    grumpy gruNT

    It was broadcast by DVN.  I got the announcement after the broadcast
    was over.
    
    				Steve

    Last night New England Cable News reported the announcement and
    cybercast. Mr. Palmer talked about our strengths and about saving the 
    company by laying off half of it. Analysts said that though Digital is 
    leaner, we're not meaner and need to be more aggressive. 

    At the end of the report, Mr. Palmer was asked what he thought of
    industry analysts and he replied, "Most of them couldn't manage a
    hamburger stand."

    Lisa

    Since the South Queensferry plant was bought by Motorola, we don't have
    anywhere in Scotland to receive DVNs live either. We rely on reading
    the text of the DVN on Livewire.
    
    Warrington is the nearest office to pick it up live - about 230 miles
    each way.
    
    Ron

    re .1  Do you know what note it is in the INTERNET_TOOLS conference? 
    I did a bunch of searchs and couldn't find any threads of discussions.
    
    	Regards,

    Hi,
    
    Do a search on realaudio, there's afew notes there.  I too used my own
    ISP to connect.  Had about four other Deccies (Digitalees) around. 
    Everyone was glad to participate and the product worked very well.
    

    � re .1  Do you know what note it is in the INTERNET_TOOLS conference? 
    � I did a bunch of searchs and couldn't find any threads of discussions.

Try note 3338 entitled "RealAudio and DEC proxy !!!!!", especially Stephen
Stuart's reply in 3338.21.

When in doubt, use Comet (http://comet.alf.dec.com) to do the search.

j.

We were tuned into the RealAudio cybercast through an ISP also,
but we never received any synchronized slides.  The RealAudio docs
say you can't do sync slides with a live broadcast because it requires
an events file (see http://ibgzkont1.zko.dec.com/users/k/kusekoski/
for more than you'll ever want to know, including some inside the
firewall demos).  We did get the same intro slide refreshing about
once a minute, but I presume that's not what they intended.  Can the 
person who succeeded with this tell me exactly how you were set up
and what you saw.

Note that RealAudio 2.0 works just fine in TCP-only more, and in fact
I got better results than with UDP.  Given that, there's no earthly
reason not to support RealAudio through firewalls.  The main issues
are getting the application relay done, which Ilene Lang's group
should do, and the firewall policy that says it's OK.  As another
respondent points out, these are two separate issues.  FYI, RealAudio
bandwidth can be as low as 1KB/sec, which places less of a load on the
net than downloading those weather maps.

If you have questions or comments, please send email, as I don't follow
this conference.

Thanks
gk

[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]

    Thanks.  Couldn't find anything under 'cybercast' and 'realaudio'
    yesterday.  However, there's six entries under 'realaudio' today. 
    Must have mis-typed.
    
    	Regards,

    re:Palmer talked about our strengths and about saving the
        company by laying off half of it. 
    
    and
    
    
    what he thought of
        industry analysts and he replied, "Most of them couldn't manage a
        hamburger stand."
    
    
    I guess hamburger stand managers don't abide by the downsizing
    philosophy.....
    
    

  The other interesting observation, from my point of view, is that
  you can get RealAudio through an ISP for under US$20/month, and
  for that $20, *SOMEBODY* is providing the needed bandwidth all
  the way from RealAudio to you.

  But here in our multinational, multi-billion dollar company with
  the ability to build proxys and relays and sub-distribution points,
  you can't get the RealAudio broadcast we made to our customers and
  prospects because we "can't afford the bandwidth".

                                   Atlant

I'm not sure the issue of bandwidth is the showstopper.  I think the issue
of having a UDP proxy is the one that causes us to balk.  ISPs are in the
business of providing raw internet connectivity.  Digital is in the business
of providing connectivity without opening security holes.

j.

RE: .23

	Because we have a business to run? And an ISP's business is to
	provide bandwith? Is our network not ALOT more complex than
	an ISP's? (where he/she just has a couple of T1's into one
	central office and alot of modems hanging off of them)

	Need I remind anyone in here of the severe pain our "bandwith" was
	going thru not 6-9 weeks ago? Are we really ready to absorb the
	additional overhead of RealAudio and video feeds? From what I've
	read, CCS is upgrading things, but we're not there yet.

	I want all the gee-wiz stuff too. But I also have a real business
	need to get stuff from the Internet on a seemingly daily basis.
	I don't want that interrupted by someone listening to Internet
	Talk Radio while they wait for a compile to complete.

							mike

    I got the flash graphic and real-audio.  Someone wanted to know how I
    was set up , since I got the coordinated slide show too.
    
    Starion 942, 16Mb, 133Mhz, 28.8 modem 
    
    W95, MSN, Internet explorer 2.0, VRML plug in (not that it matters)
    
    I connected through MSN to the internet using IE2.0 and went to the
    page with the cybercast.  I down loaded the real-audio software and
    then installed it.  Then I came back at about 11:35 EST and went back
    to the cybercast page and connected.  The graphics changed automatic
    like...no interference on my part.  The only time they refreshed the
    same graphics, was at the end when they were doing Q&A

Two Comments -

-  On DVN's: VHS-type control is what I want.  Like regular TV, why
   should I have to reserve a specific day/time for the DVN, when
   I should be able to "Time-Shift" the latest from Mr. Palmer & Co.?
   Of course, this might require some sort of media server *inside*
   our firewall, but I have already asked for this, and so have others.

   Bottom line is I don't need real-time delivery, but REALLY want
   access to audio and/or video feeds w/o tape duplication and etc.
   Perhaps just the funds from the travel $$$ saved if the same   
   technologies were used for internally-developed CBT would pay for
   the whole thing (outside of the Greater Boston Area, of course ;^).
   And think of the value of having geographically distributed 
   "virtual" teams that could coordinate activities w/o face-to-face
   meetings!

-  On Our Intranet: How about more latteral thinking??  Kill the 
   long-distance WAN links, and contract MCI/ AT&T/ etc. to provide
   mega-bandwidth between sites.  We can use the Site Internet-Tunnel
   to do the site-to-site connections.  As well, kill off the local
   modem pools, and use ISP access points from the outsourcer
   to get to the Intranet via the personal tunnels.  This way, the 
   Real-Audio firewall issue goes away, as well as being billed for 
   1-800 # dial-up access!!  (MAY be the real explaination for the 
   Digital/MCI/Microsoft alliance announced recently ...).

   To make this work, revamp the SALES/SI/MCS/etc. workbenches, and
   work with MS &/or Netscape to build a client interface with 
   telephone/audio/video/mail/data access capabilities via the
   tunnels. Then restrict internal networks to areas where it makes
   financial or other (security) sense, interconnected by a tunnel-based
   "backbone".

In both of these areas, Digital has the technology, the partners, the
potential markets, and the INTERNAL NEED for these capabilities.  Let's see 
how long we take to recognize the opportunity before someone else gets the 
idea.  (Hint - I suspect Bill Gates is already building this into his plans 
for Intranet-Internet dominance).

Charles

    Hmmm.
    
    what's the cost, in dollars per megabit per second or some such, of a
    DVN distributed by CD at $2 per CD versus a DVN distributed on demand
    by real networking. If you don't actually want it live, my money votes
    for the CD, and keep the net bandwidth for things where there is no
    better alternative.
    
    But then maybe I'm a heretic; I think the typical 50Kbyte
    pretty-pointless graphics on a Web page looks great in trade rags but
    when the average ISP struggles to beat 4800 baud even with a 28k8 modem
    (mine often does!) Lynx comes back into favour.
    
    regards
    john

> -  On Our Intranet: How about more latteral thinking??  Kill the 
>    long-distance WAN links, and contract MCI/ AT&T/ etc. to provide
>    mega-bandwidth between sites.  We can use the Site Internet-Tunnel
>    to do the site-to-site connections.  As well, kill off the local
>    modem pools, and use ISP access points from the outsourcer
>    to get to the Intranet via the personal tunnels.  This way, the 
>    Real-Audio firewall issue goes away, as well as being billed for 
>    1-800 # dial-up access!!  (MAY be the real explaination for the 
>    Digital/MCI/Microsoft alliance announced recently ...).

  This is pretty close to my point in my reply where I asked
  why our megabuck network couldn't provide the services that
  a $20/month network could. Essentially, I believe we're now
  being penalized by our "inside the box" thinkers, who insist
  on starving us for bandwidth while charging rather large fees.

  If they're not competitive, then we should consider taking
  our business elsewhere.
                                   Atlant

    	I agree if we spend our time outside and only come in when we need
    something inside the internal bandwidth problem will go away. Lets get 
    rid of those modem pools phone lines support equipment and long distance 
    phone calls.
    	In these trying times we need to save all the money we can. The tunnel 
    software works lets use the tools that are available. I will on my own
    I hope others will follow.

    I tuned in at a customer site by asking a friend to make the
    connection. They couldn't receive the audio through their firewall
    either (SunScreen).  My friend then connected via an ISP.  We got AM
    quality audio and slide refreshes every minute or two.
    
    It was quite impressive to the customer, me, and the Sun engineer who
    heard the audio from the next cube. The Sun guy said something like
    "AltaVista? Oh yea, that's my favorite search engine."
    
    Regards,
    David.
    

    I concur with .13 :*(
    
    What is the use of waxing lyrical about all this, when our competitors
    call us and say "have you seen this" - when you haven't, and neither
    has the rest of the Sales, support and service team (their all too busy
    trying to keep a job!!).
    
    As for the comment re Bob P giving it to the IT analysts - go for it!!
    
    IMHO, Gartner and most of the rest know diddly about the market.
    
    Maybe it's 'cos they have families that need feeding also....could'nt
    be a business reason, could there??!!
    
    Or they run burger franchises on the side....
    
    Paul W 

    There are good reasons for Digital to re-invest in it's internal
    network.  There are new applications going on over the Internet and in
    companies that are building high speed networks from scratch.  Unless
    the corporate culture is exposed to the new applications, it will be
    hard to design products that work in the new environment.  The last
    investment was in the early 80's, and brought forward applications like
    email, web-like VTX, and collaboration via vaxnotes.  Now, 15 years
    later as these applications are being rediscovered in an IP world, it's
    time to move on to the next generation.  Perhaps this time, by using an
    open protocol rather than betting the company that the world would go
    to DECnet/OSI, Digital can reap the rewards of pioneering.  
    
    bill
    

    
    re -.1
    
    >>> Perhaps this time, by using an open protocol rather than 
    >>> betting the company that the world would go
    >>> to DECnet/OSI, Digital can reap the rewards of pioneering.
    
    We made that bet on "advise" and "requirements" from the U.S.
    government. But we are to nice to ask them for compensation from
    that folly.
    
    -Mike Z.

    Is the text of this DVN available somewhere? I have asked Kate Nelson
    (Livewire) but she isnt sure. My groups business was referred to twice 
    and I'd like to be able to review what was said.
    
    regards,
    
    Barry Nestor
    

One writer's, Kirsten Alexander from Web Review, tongue-in-cheek take on
the doings at Digital's Cybercast is available at: 

    		http://webreview.com/96/05/10/tipsheet/

Starts out: 

 "This is the kind of high level event it was: instead of
 T-shirts, they gave out white polo shirts. Cybersmith was closed for most
 of the day and swarming with Digital execs, Digital tech crew, and
 journalists from places like the Wall Street Journal (in which DEC ran a
 full-page ad that day about the whole shebang). Plus the decorations (the
 blue mountains in the AltaVista logo) were strategically placed and hanging
 all over. Clearly this was going to be a BIG announcement."
    
 .
 .
 .

    AltaVista is great.  It is a marriage made in heaven for 64-bit and
    blazingly fast CPU coupled with high throughput i/o subsystem.
    
    Would somebody be willing to tell me why that technology will be as
    effective when run on my 8MB 486 DX33 (you get my drift) ?
    
    If 64-bit and Alpha (and 24GB RAM 630GB disks 30 processors) is what is
    powering the _real_ Alta Vista, how is to going to scale down?
    
    - Vikas

    re -.1
    
    >>>If 64-bit and Alpha (and 24GB RAM 630GB disks 30 processors) is what
    >>>is powering the _real_ Alta Vista, how is to going to scale down?
  
    real slow.
    
    But hey, we just introduced cluster technology to the PC world. 
    
    Just kidding!
    
    -Mike Z.
    

        I made a mistake, Alta Vista uses only 18GB of memory.

    Sorry,
    - Vikas

    P.S. Summarized from the "About Alta Vista", an excellent write-up

    	http://altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=about

    It does not have the author's name on it but whoever wrote it has done
    a marvelous job.

RE: .37

	Probably scales down quite well. How big is your disk on your
	486/33? 500MB? If so, how much of that are you going to index?

						mike

Hey, stay tuned!  We've got some great people working on the personal variant
of AltaVista Search.  I'm sure that they realize that if it requires 8 GB
of memory and a large disk farm, it won't be successful.

The difference between InterGalactic AltaVista Search and Personal AltaVista
Search is the size of the base you're indexing.  Personal is for indexing
what's in your personal universe.  Your mail, your disks, your network
shares, things like that.  Should scale down OK.

j.

AltaVista Search works just fine on 32-bit platforms, and that's not just
PCs; it's simply that for large databases or high access traffic it
benefits from big memory and the big pointers to use big memory.

___Pete