Bird Internet?
Bird Internets aren't real.
IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
11–20 of 30 posts
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#12Horse heads have also been used historically to send messages of a certain nature.
With guaranteed receipt. Or at least, they cannot be refused.
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#13Reminds me of that AWS hard drive truck thing where your data is sent with quite the latency
Alas, Snowmobile has been retired:
https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/17/amazon_snowmobile_del...> (2024).
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#14In 2009 when South African IT communication was essentially only permitted through a single entity, as a publicity stunt a small ISP did an implementation of this:
As I recall at the time, the best consumer speeds available were 512kbps with a 3GB per month cap at today’s cost of about 45USD.
The worst part (especially as a WoW player) is that QoS was applied giving priority to ports 80, 443, 110 and 25. This resulted in all other ports having terrible latency, probably added 150ms on top of the unavoidable (due to speed of light) 190ms to get to European servers.
Fortunately today the situation is much better, there are numerous FNO companies and even more numerous ISPs for each.
I pay about 45 USD for an uncapped 100Mbps connection.
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#15In 2009 when South African IT communication was essentially only permitted through a single entity, as a publicity stunt a small ISP did an implementation of this: https://pigeonrace2009.co.za/ As I recall at the time, the best consumer speeds available were 512kbps with a 3GB per month cap at today’s cost of about 45USD. The worst part (especially as a WoW player) is that QoS was applied giving priority to ports 80,…
[deleted]
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#16Disappointed there still isn't a protocol for sending messages in a bottle.
There ain't an RFC for morse code, either.
Naturally. That’s an ITU-R recommendation[1].
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#17Reminds me of that AWS hard drive truck thing where your data is sent with quite the latency
Echoing Andrew Tanenbaum's famous quip, Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#18Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#19Reminds me of that AWS hard drive truck thing where your data is sent with quite the latency
Re: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service (1999)
#20Reminds me of that AWS hard drive truck thing where your data is sent with quite the latency
Echoing Andrew Tanenbaum's famous quip, Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway .
It’s a great way to demonstrate the difference between bandwidth and latency.