Re: Using lasers to communicate
That URL should be: httpd://www.lasercomm/lasercomm Eric P.S. Thanks John for pointing this out! At 8:42 PM 2/17/96, Eric Davis wrote:
Woooa there....
Lasers are not exactly expensive or complicated....
Check out www.lasercomm.com. 4-15Mb/s lasers. or Cannon 10-100Mb/s lasers.
I have installed these products *many* times and their setup and operation is fast and efficient. (used to work for Interop)
Exmaple: We used a pair of these, and MBONE, to provide a 2 way real time video confrence link joining an IETF session between a room of users at Japan Interop (local) and a group in Sweeden (IETF). The setup a was last minute point to point Ethernet link from the confrence center to a local hotel acress the road. We had 1.5 hours to perform ALL of the work, from wiring both roofs, seting up the lasers, wiring the internal hotel/confrence center, and setting up systems and projectors. !!The Laser setup took about :15 minutes, tops!!
BTW: With this system the transmit "beam" is focused into a "spot" half way between the sending and receiving units. The receiving unit is tuned to look for that focused "spot". This means that there is a very large (area wise) low power laser pattern behind each of the receivers! With a sensitive enough receiver, it is possible to hear this signal!
When you need to transport a data stream (1-155Mb/s) to a remote site, this solution works out to be *MUCH* cheaper than leasing circuits from bell, bypass folks, etc..
Another case in point: We (ISN) needed to transport a 100Mb/s (FDDI) between \ 2 sites. Upon checking, the price of PacBell "dim" fiber was outrageous! We had no MFS/TCG/etc fiber in the man hole to latch onto. The choice was clear.
As for security, the bottom line is that encryption devices are cheap.
Last plus for these units is that most foreign countries do not prevent the use of these point to point optical devices. This is not the case for spread spectrum multipoint or microwave point to point radio devices.
Eric Davis
At 10:44 PM 2/17/96, SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N wrote:
If you have a secure link you don't need encryption. Arguably, the converse is true; if you have secure encryption you don't need a secure link. Isn't the ability to transmit secure data over insecure channels one of the primary justifications for encryption?
Of course. My point, though I seem to have failed to state it, is that encryption is a cheap software thing while laser beams are expensive, complicated, and still not secure.
------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Davis -- ericd@internet.net Director, Information Systems Internet Shopping Network -- http://www.internet.net/ 415-846-7449 Voice -- 415-842-7415 Fax -- KD6HTO Radio ------------------------------------------------------------- - One by one our rights are taken, One by one we loose our - freedom. Step by step we're coming for them, One by one - we're coming. - Inka Inka - Myth of the Machine - Step Back
------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Davis -- ericd@internet.net Director, Information Systems Internet Shopping Network -- http://www.internet.net/ 415-846-7449 Voice -- 415-842-7415 Fax -- KD6HTO Radio ------------------------------------------------------------- - One by one our rights are taken, One by one we loose our - freedom. Step by step we're coming for them, One by one - we're coming. - Inka Inka - Myth of the Machine - Step Back
That URL should be: httpd://www.lasercomm/lasercomm http://www.lasercomm.com/lasercomm works for me.
I stand corrected. I didn't realize that laser products like this were available off-the-shelf.
Lasers DO accomplish one task. They force the interceptor to commit vulnerable forces to the attack. It's pretty damn hard to get into room 24Z6 @ the Fort & prove that they are working on YOUR text -- snatched in a phonetap. It's a lot easier to catch the two guys on a bucket truck, or the Feebs doing a black bag job on Ames' PC. That's exactly why TPTB prefer Option A, the FBI wiretap act, to B. But a more interesting question, maybe for Brian. How DO the wiretap laws treat non common-carrier communications -- be it YOUR wire strung from Tom to Jerry's house, or such? And where does the FCC authority stop, and whoever regulates laser-safety start? I vaguely recall that some BBC competitor was going to use the wavelength loophole to get around the Beeb's monopoly... so the Crown immediately raised the bar up to the gamma ray level or such. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
participants (3)
-
David Lesher -
ericd＠shop.internet.net -
SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N