Jorge Amodio wrote:
You, seemingly, do not have much knowledge on UUNET.
Of course I don't :-)
atina agomar(DAILY), antar(DAILY), biotlp(DAILY), cab(HOURLY),
cedro(EVENING), cenep(DAILY), cneaint(DAILY), cnea(EVENING),
cnielf(DAILY), colimpo(DAILY), confein(DAILY),
>
>
> You, seemingly, do not have much knowledge on UUNET.
>
> Of course I don't :-)
#N atina
#S Everex 386 Step 33; SCO Xenix System V 2.3.3
#O Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto
#C Jorge Marcelo Amodio
#E atina!postmaster
#T +54 1 315 4804, Fax: +54 1 315
Jorge Amodio wrote:
This gets sort of merged with DTN (Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking.)
I have been saying that DTN is a reinvention of UUNET.
Hmmm, nope not even close.
You, seemingly, do not have much knowledge on UUNET.
As such, it should be noted that, in UUNET, availability
>
>
> > This gets sort of merged with DTN (Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking.)
>
> I have been saying that DTN is a reinvention of UUNET.
>
Hmmm, nope not even close.
>
> As such, it should be noted that, in UUNET, availability of
> phone links between computers was scheduled.
>
You must be
Jorge Amodio wrote:
We are in the process of starting a new Working Group at IETF, Timer
Variant Routing or TVR.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/tvr/about/
Some of the uses cases are for space applications where you can predict or
schedule the availability and capacity of "links" (radio,
I think it's useful to clarify terminology - the starlink antenna unit
itself is the CPE. With my v1 starlink terminal you can plug literally
anything into the PoE injector that is a 1500 MTU 1000BaseT DHCP client and
it'll get an address and a default route out to the internet. All of the
smarts
FYI,
We are in the process of starting a new Working Group at IETF, Timer
Variant Routing or TVR.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/tvr/about/
Some of the uses cases are for space applications where you can predict or
schedule the availability and capacity of "links" (radio, optical)
This gets
On 1/23/23 3:14 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
The original and traditional high-cost way of how this is done for
MEO/LEO is exemplified by an o3b terminal, which has two active
motorized tracking antennas. The antenna presently in use for the
satellite that is overhead follows it until it's
The original and traditional high-cost way of how this is done for MEO/LEO
is exemplified by an o3b terminal, which has two active motorized tracking
antennas. The antenna presently in use for the satellite that is overhead
follows it until it's descending towards the horizon, while at the same
My original thought was this would be more like Client Optimized Roaming with
WiFi access points.
Communication between the client dish or base station and satellites to
transparently move client dish and base station from satellites moving out of
view to a satellite in view.
Kevin McCormick
For the people who have seen their US48 state earth station setups in
person it is pretty normal on the network level. Being colocated with major
inter-city long haul dark fiber DWDM regen sites (Level3 dark fiber path
Seattle to Boise, ID which has a regen hut site in Prosser, WA is a perfect
Don’t quote me on this, but I wouldn’t say they are doing anything different
than you or I can do and have access to on the routing layer. It's probably
just Nokia and Arista and whatever those systems provide. Stuff like Tunneling,
ECMP, BFD and VxLan... Think spatially coordinated Zerotier
My present understanding is that starlink satellites with lasers are not
designed to communicate inter-plane. Each launch of starlink satellites is
put into exactly the same orbital inclination (53.2 degrees or the more
rare near polar orbits now launched from Vandenberg).
In the weeks and months
(inline)
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 4:44 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
the ability to route messages between each satellite. Would conventional
>> routing protocols be up to such a challenge?
>
>
If conventional is taken to mean "stock" link-state stuff, then probably no
(speculating).
> Or would it
On 2023-01-23 19:08, I wrote:
> I get that for 1310 nm light, the doppler shift would be just under
> 0.07 nm, or 12.2 GHz:
> [...]
> In the ITU C band, I get the doppler shift to be about 10.5 GHz (at
> channel 72, 197200 GHz or 1520.25 nm).
> [...]
> These shifts are noticably less than typical
Appreciate that. Definitely becoming clear to me that a lot of my knowledge
here was rusty. Lots of papers on this specifically (Doppler effects on
optical ISL) that I need to call in some favors to get access to.
Thanks!
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 1:08 PM Thomas Bellman wrote:
> On 2023-01-23
I think it's also likely that only modest, if any, WDM is required on those
links, because the goal in most cases will only be to go far enough to get
down to a ground station (excepting some low latency transatlantic use
cases I have read might be in the offing), and because the satellite RF
On 2023-01-23 17:27, Tom Beecher wrote:
> What I didn't think was adequately solved was what Starlink shows in
> marketing snippets, that is birds in completely different orbital
> inclinations (sometimes close to 90 degrees off) shooting messages to each
> other. Last I had read the dopplar
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 8:54 PM Tom Beecher wrote:
> Yes re: Iridium. Contrary to what the Chief Huckster may say, inter-sat comms
> are not some revolutionary thing that he invented.
1990s Iridium was a modified version of GSM/ATM with the packetization
and routing that implies. I don't know
>
> Elon for whatever reason is insane enough to dump a lot of cash in
> industries which everyone said was a dead end and then has been lucky
> enough to prove the old guard wrong.
>
>
- Nobody had 'given up' on reusable launch vehicles. SpaceX (to their
credit) just made it a core requirement
Raymond / Jorge -
Thanks for that info. Quoting from the paper, that does match my current
understanding, being :
II. FEATURES OF INTER-SATELLITE COMMUNICATION LINKS AND DESIGN
> CONSIDERATIONS This work is aimed to design efficient ISCs links for a
> group of small satellites flying in cluster
Like I said, they're calling it revolutionary. Didn't say it was.
However the idea that you can build spaceships which are fully reusable was
certainly around the industry, but the consensus was largely "we tried, it
costs too much, so we're sticking with one use rockets". Elon for
Musk didn't do anything revolutionary, besides launching a shload of LEO
satellites.
NASA and DoD have been working for long time on optical space
communications, last year LCRD was launched and preliminary tests using it
as a relay showed 622Mpbs, this year NASA will include on one of the
cargo
Matthew Petach wrote:
Unlike most terrestrial links, the distances between satellites are
not fixed, and thus the latency between nodes is variable, making the
concept of "Shortest Path First" calculation a much more dynamic and
challenging one to keep current, as the latency along a path may
I think the thing they're calling revolutionary is the idea of those links
being directional lasers.
It makes some sense... if you can basically emit the same signal you'd
shoot down a strand of single mode but aim it through the mostly vacuum of
space in the exact direction of your neighbor
Solved years ago …
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ielaam/92/8502886/8412572-aam.pdf
-Jorge
> On Jan 23, 2023, at 1:30 AM, Raymond Burkholder wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 1/22/23 21:54, Tom Beecher wrote:
>> Yes re: Iridium. Contrary to what the Chief Huckster may say, inter-sat
>> comms are not some
On 1/22/23 21:54, Tom Beecher wrote:
Yes re: Iridium. Contrary to what the Chief Huckster may say, inter-sat
comms are not some revolutionary thing that he invented.
It’s also not likely to function anything like they show in marketing
promos, with data magically zipping around the
On 23/01/2023 0:42, Michael Thomas wrote:
I read in the Economist that the gen of starlink satellites will have
the ability to route messages between each satellite. Would
conventional routing protocols be up to such a challenge? Or would it
have to be custom made for that problem? And since a
Yes re: Iridium. Contrary to what the Chief Huckster may say, inter-sat
comms are not some revolutionary thing that he invented.
It’s also not likely to function anything like they show in marketing
promos, with data magically zipping around the constellation between nodes
in different
I suspect, although I have no references, that satellite to ground
connectivity is probably more “circuit-based” than per-packet or frame.
Iridium has done inter satellite communication for decades. I wonder if it
wouldn’t be something very similar. Although it would be totally on-brand
for them
On 1/22/23 16:05, Matthew Petach wrote:
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 2:45 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
I read in the Economist that the gen of starlink satellites will have
the ability to route messages between each satellite. Would
conventional
routing protocols be up to such a
On 1/22/23 3:05 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 2:45 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
I read in the Economist that the gen of starlink satellites will have
the ability to route messages between each satellite. Would
conventional
routing protocols be up to such a
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 2:45 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
> I read in the Economist that the gen of starlink satellites will have
> the ability to route messages between each satellite. Would conventional
> routing protocols be up to such a challenge? Or would it have to be
> custom made for that
33 matches
Mail list logo
