“Every computer that is connected to the internet is part of a network.”
“The internet is simply a network of networks.”
POP = Point of Presence
NAP = Network Access Point
Routers determine where to send info from one comp to another – it makes sure info doesn’t go where its not needed, and that it does go where it is needed.
ISP’s connect their users w/other ISP’s users through NAP’s, and routers keep our stuff safe in the process of all this sharing??
And, is a backbone something each ISP has of its own?
What does “the default network” (as referenced during the section about reserved IP addresses (0.0.0.0.)) mean?
You used to have to provide the IP address of any computer you wanted to establish a link with. DNS is necessary b/c now there are too many computers and IP addresses to manage. DNS “maps text names to IP addresses automatically.”
DNS allows for web addresses to have words instead of IP addresses (decimal numbers)
Domain name = .com, .org, .net, .edu, .gov, or howstuffworks.com
Left most word in a URL is the host name.
“All of the machines on the internet are either servers or clients.”
Machines that provide services = servers; machines used to connect to services = clients
I’d like a more thorough break down… like, what is (physically) a NAP or Backbone? Do most ISP’s use existing phone/cable lines for their services? What is it that they are actually providing? It seems to me like it is way overpriced if much of the infrastructure already exists.
Because my experience in a traditional library setting is limited, I don’t have much experience w/ILS. I know the Free Library of Phila uses Sirsi, and that there is some kind of cool semantic mapping that happens when you search the catalog… but that’s about the extent of my knowledge.
Reading this made me understand why certain systems lack interoperability though – I hadn’t really realized before that there were even often 2 different systems working (as in the peoplesoft example).
With my limited knowledge in mind, take my opinion lightly, but I have to say it anyway – sometimes starting over from scratch is a lot easier.
“If they can’t obtain something via keyboard, it may as well not exist.”
I think this sentiment is apt to describe the changes of the ‘internet generation.’ And I think this author makes a good point for digitization – the parallel he draws to loss hits home for me. As society becomes more and more accustomed to the internet and some of the sophisticated search abilities now available, those resources that aren’t digital will likely get lost in the abyss of information. If someone types in any word in Google, they are going to get some results – probably thousands. So, if there is this much to sort through already without leaving the house, why bother going to find some book? Librarians probably cringe at the thought of this, because they know that it isn’t all good information. But, most people don’t, and that’s the way it is. I don’t think this will be as much a problem in academia in general, really – but for the general population, perhaps digitization is a good thing. And, for academics, it could potentially save them a lot of research money – they may not have to travel in order to get resources. But, what information they would have come by in their travels are they missing b/c of that conveniently scanned article? I’m not against digitization, but I do think that everyone should be urged to seek out books and paper every now and then, regardless of whether it is a perceived need.
Google answers is new to me – really cool that you can pay a reasonable amount of money to have someone go research whatever you think is important! I wonder though, what the rights would look like after.
I also love the 20% idea (that Google wants their employees to spend 20% if their time doing whatever they think is most important) – perhaps if librarians were able to do this, ILS would be better, among other things.
No comments:
Post a Comment