<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Bringing this back to the real world,
seems like another perfect case example for DTN - Delay/Disruption
Tolerant Networking - <a
href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4838">rfc4838</a>,<a
href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5050"> rfc5050</a><br>
<br>
<br>
On 3/09/2015 5:32 PM, Mark Smith wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAO42Z2z8XLm_WWngKLsDDeAee=mYzr=Oiw+vROj4NbEnEHem-Q@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 3 September 2015 at 17:17, Paul Brooks <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au"><pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">If I use hungry eagles instead, will I be:
(a) non-compliant with the RFC
(b) offering a lower-latency service
(c) subject to ACCC investigation when other's links mysteriously fail
(d) all of the above
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
So if pigeon loss is too high, it might be necessary to resort to a
more reliable link layer, taking into account BCP 89/RFC 3819's advice
("Advice for Internet Subnetwork Designers"),
"Error recovery in the subnetwork is therefore
justifiable only to the extent that it can enhance overall
performance. It is important to recognize that a subnetwork can go
too far in attempting to provide error recovery services in the
Internet environment. Subnet reliability should be "lightweight",
i.e., it only has to be "good enough", *not* perfect."
and resort to a tank link-layer.
RFC 1217, "Memo from the Consortium for Slow Commotion Research (CSCR)"
" This system uses a highly redundant optical communication technique
to achieve ultra-low, ultra-robust transmission. The basic unit is
the M1A1 tank. Each tank is labelled with the number 0 or 1 painted
four feet high on the tank turret in yellow, day-glo luminescent
paint."
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
On 3/09/2015 4:32 PM, Jim Woodward wrote:
It's all good in theory until your network delivery team calls in with bird
flu :)
On 3/09/2015 3:20 PM, Purdon, Bob wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">So I reckon you'd be on solid ground if you used RFC1149.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
I recall that PIPE Networks did a trial of RFC1149 some time ago from the
127 Creek St office. Wasn't terribly successful :-)
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhjn8kbFe74">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhjn8kbFe74</a>
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>