Vergesst TCP/IP

[Vaneth]

Network Working Group D. Waitzman
Request for Comments: 1149 BBN STC
1 April 1990


A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers

Status of this Memo

This memo describes an experimental method for the encapsulation of
IP datagrams in avian carriers. This specification is primarily
useful in Metropolitan Area Networks. This is an experimental, not
recommended standard. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Overview and Rational

Avian carriers can provide high delay, low throughput, and low
altitude service. The connection topology is limited to a single
point-to-point path for each carrier, used with standard carriers,
but many carriers can be used without significant interference with
each other, outside of early spring. This is because of the 3D ether
space available to the carriers, in contrast to the 1D ether used by
IEEE802.3. The carriers have an intrinsic collision avoidance
system, which increases availability. Unlike some network
technologies, such as packet radio, communication is not limited to
line-of-sight distance. Connection oriented service is available in
some cities, usually based upon a central hub topology.

Frame Format

The IP datagram is printed, on a small scroll of paper, in
hexadecimal, with each octet separated by whitestuff and blackstuff.
The scroll of paper is wrapped around one leg of the avian carrier.
A band of duct tape is used to secure the datagram's edges. The
bandwidth is limited to the leg length. The MTU is variable, and
paradoxically, generally increases with increased carrier age. A
typical MTU is 256 milligrams. Some datagram padding may be needed.

Upon receipt, the duct tape is removed and the paper copy of the
datagram is optically scanned into a electronically transmittable
form.

Discussion

Multiple types of service can be provided with a prioritized pecking
order. An additional property is built-in worm detection and
eradication. Because IP only guarantees best effort delivery, loss
of a carrier can be tolerated. With time, the carriers are self-



Waitzman [Page 1]

RFC 1149 IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers 1 April 1990


regenerating. While broadcasting is not specified, storms can cause
data loss. There is persistent delivery retry, until the carrier
drops. Audit trails are automatically generated, and can often be
found on logs and cable trays.

Security Considerations

Security is not generally a problem in normal operation, but special
measures must be taken (such as data encryption) when avian carriers
are used in a tactical environment.

Author's Address

David Waitzman
BBN Systems and Technologies Corporation
BBN Labs Division
10 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA 02238

Phone: (617) 873-4323

EMail:

Quelle:

[Maybe It's Maybelline]

Wird etwas schwer sein den Witz zu erkennen für laien.

[JohnDS]

Super Marie!

Ich hab mich schon auf die ganzen 'HÄH Wo ist der Witz? Hallo?' Sager gefreut!
Jetzt hast du sie verjaukt!

Das ist der beste Part:

storms can cause
data loss.

Muhahah

[pwnzomg]

olol bissel englisch reicht da schon

[Vaneth]

Originally posted by JohnDS@Nov 6 2006, 02:31
Super Marie!

Ich hab mich schon auf die ganzen 'HÄH Wo ist der Witz? Hallo?' Sager gefreut!
Jetzt hast du sie verjaukt!

Das ist der beste Part:

Muhahah

Auch mein Favorit. Aber das habe ich ja gestern schon im IRC kundgetan. Eine weitere Frage: Wie langweilig muss jemandem sein ...?

[mr.rattlz]

Du solltest den Titel deines ersten Posts aber irgendwie ändern Vaneth, da IP ja immer noch benutzt wird (layer 3), und die beiden unterliegenden layer 1 und 2 ersetzt werden.
Layer 2 wäre in diesem Falle die Art und Weise wie Frames an Tauben festgebunden werden, und Layer 1 wäre die Taube selber (verbunden mit dem Raum den sie durchfliegt).


edit:
1999 Wurde der Standard übrigens erweitert und im RFC2549 beschrieben:

Network Working Group                  D. Waitzman
Request for Comments: 2549            IronBridge Networks
Updates: 1149                      1 April 1999
Category: Experimental


       IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service

Status of this Memo

  This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
  community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.
  Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.
  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

  This memo amends RFC 1149, "A Standard for the Transmission of IP
  Datagrams on Avian Carriers", with Quality of Service information.
  This is an experimental, not recommended standard.

Overview and Rational

  The following quality of service levels are available: Concorde,
  First, Business, and Coach. Concorde class offers expedited data
  delivery. One major benefit to using Avian Carriers is that this is
  the only networking technology that earns frequent flyer miles, plus
  the Concorde and First classes of service earn 50% bonus miles per
  packet. Ostriches are an alternate carrier that have much greater
  bulk transfer capability but provide slower delivery, and require the
  use of bridges between domains.

  The service level is indicated on a per-carrier basis by bar-code
  markings on the wing. One implementation strategy is for a bar-code
  reader to scan each carrier as it enters the router and then enqueue
  it in the proper queue, gated to prevent exit until the proper time.
  The carriers may sleep while enqueued.

  For secure networks, carriers may have classes Prime or Choice.
  Prime carriers are self-keying when using public key encryption.
  Some distributors have been known to falsely classify Choice carriers
  as Prime.

  Packets MAY be marked for deletion using RED paint while enqueued.



Waitzman           Experimental           [Page 1]

RFC 2549      IP over Avian Carriers with QoS     1 April 1999


  Weighted fair queueing (WFQ) MAY be implemented using scales, as
  shown:

                         __
                 _____/-----\  / o\
                 <____  _____\_/  >--
         +-----+       \ /  /______/
         | 10g |        /|:||/
         +-----+       /____/|
         | 10g |          |
         +-----+     ..    X
        ===============================
               ^
               |
             =========

  Carriers in the queue too long may leave log entries, as shown on the
  scale.

  The following is a plot of traffic shaping, from coop-erative host
  sites.


    Alt |    Plot of Traffic Shaping showing carriers in flight
      |
     2k |      ....................
      |     .          .
      |     .           .
     1k |    .            .
      |  +---+             +---+
      |  | A |             | B |
      |  +---+             +---+
      |_____________________________________________


  Avian carriers normally bypass bridges and tunnels but will seek out
  worm hole tunnels. When carrying web traffic, the carriers may
  digest the spiders, leaving behind a more compact representation.
  The carriers may be confused by mirrors.

  Round-robin queueing is not recommended. Robins make for well-tuned
  networks but do not support the necessary auto-homing feature.

  A BOF was held at the last IETF but only Avian Carriers were allowed
  entry, so we don't know the results other than we're sure they think
  MPLS is great. Our attempts at attaching labels to the carriers have
  been met with resistance.




Waitzman           Experimental           [Page 2]

RFC 2549      IP over Avian Carriers with QoS     1 April 1999


  NATs are not recommended either -- as with many protocols, modifying
  the brain-embedded IP addresses is difficult, plus Avian Carriers MAY
  eat the NATs.

  Encapsulation may be done with saran wrappers. Unintentional
  encapsulation in hawks has been known to occur, with decapsulation
  being messy and the packets mangled.

  Loose source routes are a viable evolutionary alternative enhanced
  standards-based MSWindows-compliant technology, but strict source
  routes MUST NOT be used, as they are a choke-point.

  The ITU has offered the IETF formal alignment with its corresponding
  technology, Penguins, but that won't fly.

  Multicasting is supported, but requires the implementation of a clone
  device. Carriers may be lost if they are based on a tree as it is
  being pruned. The carriers propagate via an inheritance tree. The
  carriers have an average TTL of 15 years, so their use in expanding
  ring searches is limited.

  Additional quality of service discussion can be found in a Michelin's
  guide.

MIB and Management issues

  AvCarrier2 OBJECT-TYPE
   SYNTAX   SEQUENCE OF DNA
   MAX-ACCESS can't-read
   STATUS   living
   DESCRIPTION "Definition of an avian carrier"
   ::= { life eukaryotes mitochondrial_eukaryotes crown_eukaryotes
      metazoa chordata craniata vertebrata gnathostomata
      sarcopterygii terrestrial_vertebrates amniota diapsida
      archosauromorpha archosauria dinosauria aves neornithes
      columbiformes columbidae columba livia }

  AvCarrier OBJECT-TYPE
   SYNTAX   SET OF Cells
   MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
   STATUS   obsolete
   DESCRIPTION "Definition of an avian carrier"
   ::= { life animalia chordata vertebrata aves
      columbiformes columbidae columba livia }

  PulseRate OBJECT-TYPE
   SYNTAX   Gauge(0..300)
   MAX-ACCESS read-only



Waitzman           Experimental           [Page 3]

RFC 2549      IP over Avian Carriers with QoS     1 April 1999


   STATUS   current
   DESCRIPTION "Pulse rate of carrier, as measured in neck.
         Frequent sampling is disruptive to operations."
   ::= { AvCarrier 1}

  The carriers will not line up in lexigraphic order but will
  naturally order in a large V shape. Bulk retrieval is possible
  using the Powerful Get-Net operator.

Specification of Requirements

  In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
  of the specification. These words are often capitalized.

  MUST   Usually.

  MUST NOT Usually not.

  SHOULD  Only when Marketing insists.

  MAY    Only if it doesn't cost extra.

Security Considerations

  There are privacy issues with stool pigeons.

  Agoraphobic carriers are very insecure in operation.

Patent Considerations

  There is ongoing litigation about which is the prior art: carrier or
  egg.

References

  Waitzman, D., "A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on
  Avian Carriers", RFC 1149, 1 April 1990.

ACKnowledgments

  Jim.Carlson.Ibnets.com > Jon.Saperia . ack 32 win 123 (DF)
  Ross Callon, Scott Bradner, Charlie Lynn ...









Waitzman           Experimental           [Page 4]

RFC 2549      IP over Avian Carriers with QoS     1 April 1999


Author's Address

  David Waitzman
  IronBridge Networks
  55 Hayden Ave
  Lexington, MA 02421
  Phone: (781) 372-8161

  EMail: [email][/email]










































Waitzman           Experimental           [Page 5]

RFC 2549      IP over Avian Carriers with QoS     1 April 1999


Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.

  This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
  others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
  or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
  and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
  kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
  included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
  document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
  the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
  Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
  developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
  copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
  followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
  English.

  The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
  revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

  This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
  TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
  BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
  HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
  MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
























Waitzman           Experimental           [Page 6]


Bilder von der ersten Implementierung gibt es dort: