Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Vint Cerf Preps Interplanetary Internet Protocol

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the would-be-helpful-at-the-jupiter-hotel-too dept.

Space 177

TechFiends32 writes "After years of working with NASA to bring Internet connectivity to deep space, scientists say Vint Cerf's efforts may be nearing completion. To combat the apparent challenges of extending the Internet into space (such as meteors and weighty, high-powered antennas), Cerf and others have made significant efforts, like adjusting satellite-based IP, and working on delay-tolerant networking (DTN) to address pure IP's limitations in space. According to principal engineer at The Mitre Corp., Keith Scott, 'The 2010 goal is designed to bring DTN to a sufficient level of maturity to incorporate it into designs for robotic and human lunar exploration.'"

cancel ×

177 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Caching would be great here too (1)

Sybert42 (1309493) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324443)

Cool stuff. The caching mechanisms to make information even remotely useful would be great back here on Earth. I hate even a few hundred milliseconds of delay when flipping from page to page. Google of course has a rediculously low latency seemingly in both transmission and server-side processing. I'm going to try and download the huge Wikipedia database and see if I can get it working completely locally. Click, click, click. No waiting, no flipping pages. At some point you need to start bundling large amounts of data to a local proxy.

Re:Caching would be great here too (3, Interesting)

dk90406 (797452) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324605)

Yes, caching seems very nice. But the article don't explain how they'll handle the huge latency. It must have a huge floating windows for ACK/retransmits.
On a less serious hand, I hope the satellite IP connections are severed from the Ethernet (like electrical plants are (or should be in some cases), or hacking a satellite will be the next goal.

Re:Caching would be great here too (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324659)

aw, shit. now goatcx will be trolled into outer space, giving a new meaning to the term black hole.

Re:Caching would be great here too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325613)

on the positive side, we can have pr0n servers located in Mars or the Moon, and have live webcams broadcasting naked Moonite girls...

Re:Caching would be great here too (4, Informative)

jandrese (485) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324665)

The trick is that you don't have to use TCP as your transport layer. DTN bundles can be transmitted over UDP, NORM, sneakernet, carrier pigeon, or anything else you can write a convergence layer for. Since DTN abstracts away the lower levels, each hop can use the transport layer that is most appropriate, like TCP on an internet hop, SCPS on a satellite hop, etc...

More information is available on the DTN Research Group's homepage: http://dtnrg.org [dtnrg.org] .

Hacking a satellite to get free TV is as bad as... (0, Offtopic)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325023)

Hacking a satellite to get free TV is as bad as hacking electrical plants?

Re:Hacking a satellite to get free TV is as bad as (1)

ReverendLoki (663861) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325223)

Hacking a satellite to get free TV is as bad as hacking electrical plants?

No, but I suppose hacking an old Cold War era Soviet "Weather Satellite" might be.

C'mon, you know they exist. Several hundred Hollywood movies can't all be wrong.

Re:Hacking a satellite to get free TV is as bad as (1)

Mattsson (105422) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326711)

That would require bringing it home, retrofit it to be able to use IP and then putting it back up there. =)

Unless, of course, if they can do a "simple" firmware upgrade via standard satellite communications to make it talk IP.

But I agree that they probably should keep this interplanetary internet separate from The Internet, or at least have one hell of a firewall in between.
Imagine a manned lunar-lander being hacked, with some idiot hacker, who has no idea of what the system he has hacked actually does or controls, managing to activate separation or whatnot with his stupidity. =P

Re:Caching would be great here too (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324643)

Caching is not as helpfull as you may imagine in this context. Think about it, what would a deep space probe need to look up? Interplanetary communication is all about the sending of commands and recieving of data... or are you one of those people who thinks there's a good reason to put people in space?

Re:Caching would be great here too (2, Funny)

HolyCrapSCOsux (700114) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324745)

I'd like to put a few people in space, sans suit.

Re:Caching would be great here too (5, Insightful)

jandrese (485) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324797)

Caching is very useful in space. What happens when your satellite orbits around to the other side of Mars? You have several hours of no-communication and have to store everything you were going to send (and people on the other end have to store what they were going to send to you).

Re:Caching would be great here too (1)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325609)

Putting lots of people somewhere not earth is insurance in the event we screw up too badly on earth. Putting all your eggs in this single, fragile basket is a bad idea.

Re:Caching would be great here too (5, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324681)

I think you're missing the point. The general idea here is to have a packet switched communications system throughout the solar system. That way if a probe is in the shadow of, say, Jupiter, it can bounce a signal off a probe orbiting Venus, which will relay the signal back to Earth.

The end result would be a more robust communications system. In the future, interplanetary communications satellites could even end up doing most of the grunt-work, thus allowing probes and manned spacecraft to carry smaller communications packages designed to work with the network rather than broadcasting in as many conditions as possible.

such a network would also be useful for astronauts on another planet or meteor. Rather than setting up a communications station, they can use orbiting satellites to relay their transmissions. (Something which NASA already does on a smaller scale with probes like the Mars rovers.)

Re:Caching would be great here too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325547)

Additionally, if we expand the network far enough, should one of our manned spacecraft be transported to the Delta quadrant it would be able to transmit its holographic doctor back to one of our ships in the Alpha quadrant.

Re:Caching would be great here too (1)

SignOfZeta (907092) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326617)

Since you know, with the way things are going, some astronaut is going to buy an iPhone 3G. Then they'll show it to their co-workers, and their co-workers might get one.

And then it's only a matter of time before Apple starts getting support calls from astronauts wondering why there's no signal.

And then AT&T (or whomever is in your country) will get support calls about how there's no signal in space.

And then some astronaut's 14-year-old cousin will make a cantenna out of a Pringles can, wire it to his home access point, and point it straight up. There must be a better way, and that's what good old Vint Cerf has been up to.

Re:Caching would be great here too (1)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326867)

Does this mean I get my NeptuneCam ?
What kind of bandwidth have they got ?

Batman (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324479)

Asia Ferguson waited. The lights above him blinked and sparked out of the air. There were coasters in the park. He didn't see them, but had expected them now for years. His warnings to Dad were not listenend to and now it was too late. Far too late for now, anyway.
Asia was a hat wearing nigga for fourteen years. When he was young he watched the coasters and he said to dad "I want to be on the coasters daddy."
Dad said "No! You will BE KILL BY COASTERS"
There was a time when he believed him. Then as he got oldered he stopped. But now in the park at the base of the coaster he knew there were coasters.
"This is DAD" the radio crackered. "You must fight the coasters!"
So Asia gotted his hat and climbed up the wall.
"HE GOING TO KILL US" said the coasters
"I will shoot at him" said the coaster and he fired the a line of cars. Asia nigged at him and tried to blew him up. But then the ceiling fell and they were trapped and not able to kill.
"No! I must kill the coasters" he shouted
The radio said "No, Asia. You are batman"
And then Asia was dead.

Re:Batman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324591)

Yay, with 4chan under a DDOS, we're getting flooded by /b/ copypasta.

OP, you're the cancer.

Re:Batman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324705)

I am missing 4cahn

Re:Batman (0, Troll)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325197)

GTFO my //./

Porn (1)

SonicEarth (1246632) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324517)

Nice, now I can look up porn on the moon! Oh, and Slashdot too of course. :)

Re:Porn (0, Offtopic)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325121)

At least you've got your priorities straight.

More work to be done (4, Funny)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324533)

I assume then that at some point someone will have to write up a new RFC on "IP Over Space-Avian Carrier"?

Re:More work to be done (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325497)

Dude, thats just silly. Everybody knows Giant Space Hamsters are the organic telecom relay of choice in this situation. Go for the stars Boo, go for the stars!

KA9Q (4, Informative)

karl.auerbach (157250) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324539)

Phil Karn's old KA9Q implementation of TCP (for amateur radio) was designed to accommodate very long delays.

Re:KA9Q (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324917)

Yes, but who can resist the acronym VoIPIP?

Re:KA9Q (1)

felipekk (1007591) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325705)

They should test this on the current data network in Brazil. Internet connections there are a joke.

Re:KA9Q (3, Funny)

Jimbookis (517778) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325849)

Phil Karn's old KA9Q implementation of TCP (for amateur radio) was designed to accommodate very long delays.

Only because it takes such a long time to tap out IP packets in morse code.

Work on the basics first (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324595)

Could they work on a secure internet with email that isn't 90% spam down here on earth first before they worry about putting websites on Mars?

mooncam (3, Interesting)

nblender (741424) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324607)

I can't wait for the very first webcam on the moon; to see a live earthrise, etc ...

Re:mooncam (5, Informative)

SKiRgE (411560) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324895)

actually there is no such thing as an earthrise on the moon, as the moon does not 'rotate' in relation to it's movement around the earth. At any point on the surface of the moon facing the earth, the earth will always be in the same point in the sky, always.

Re:mooncam (2, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325231)

actually there is no such thing as an earthrise on the moon, as the moon does not 'rotate' in relation to it's movement around the earth. At any point on the surface of the moon facing the earth, the earth will always be in the same point in the sky, always.

An 'earthrise' is still possible, you just have to put the mooncam on a buggy and drive in the correct direction.

Re:mooncam (1)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325337)

Yes, this is correct. Perhaps what he may want to see is the sun rising over the earth. Although it had better be a HD webcam, I can't imagine why anyone would want some rubbish 320x320 webcam on the moon. On a related note, NASA's blue marble project has these spectacular views in very nice resolutions.

Re:mooncam (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325531)

Wrong.
Libration causes the visible face of the moon to oscillate slightly.
Therefore, you can see an Earthrise from certain points on the moon without being in motion relative to the moon yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration

Re:mooncam (3, Interesting)

Kingrames (858416) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325663)

"Earthrise" is the name given to the famous picture taken of the earth from the moon. You have most likely seen it, it's the most famous picture of the Earth.

Africa is prominently visible in the picture, if you're curious.

Re:mooncam (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326851)

And if you are REALLY curious, you can look at it [google.com]

Re:mooncam (3, Informative)

Tweenk (1274968) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326029)

Your argument seems good at the surface, but it's not true!

The truth is that the Moon librates [wikipedia.org] a bit (a few degrees), so there actually ARE earthrises when you are near the edge of the Earth-observable Moon surface. The Earth just doesn't do a full circle around the sky, it travels along a Lissajous figure.

Even Wikipedia is incorrect on this, at least when you look up "Earthrise".

Re:mooncam (3, Informative)

Tweenk (1274968) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326093)

Before anyone questions this: The angular span of the Moon's libration is a few times larger than the angular diameter of the Earth as seen from Moon.

Re:mooncam (1)

SignOfZeta (907092) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326639)

Even Wikipedia is incorrect on this, at least when you look up "Earthrise".

So fix it. Otherwise, people who don't read Slashdot (if there are any left) will continue to spread lies.

Re:mooncam (1)

guitaristx (791223) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326107)

The phenomenon is known as Tidal Locking [wikipedia.org] .

Re:mooncam (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326117)

Earthrise on Moon IS possible. Moon's orbit is not a perfect circle, that's why we have http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Librations [wikipedia.org]

In the best case Earth rises at about 15 degrees.

Again not true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24326351)

You just have to wait long enough. It SLOWLY changes faces. Got a million years?

E-Z solution (tm) (1)

MaXiMiUS (923393) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324625)

http://stargate.wikia.com/wiki/Subspace_communication [wikia.com]

Ha!

(Kind of pathetic that I had to go through that article and correct about a dozen typos before posting it here..)

Bold (Crazy) Prediction (4, Funny)

religious freak (1005821) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324685)

This will be in wider use in 30 years than IPv6

Maybe not, but wouldn't it be crazy if it was?

Re:Bold (Crazy) Prediction (1)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325273)

The only way to make ipv6 is to force it down the throats of the ISPs. Too bad force and business don't mix. Unless it's the businesses that force something through(like the DMCA)...

Re:Bold (Crazy) Prediction (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325351)

Interestingly enough, the only way I'll use IPv6 at home is if my ISP offers it. I have no interest in trying to set up complicated tunnels on my dynamic home link.

From TFA (3, Interesting)

scubamage (727538) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324727)

"Reliability in DTN is provided by a mechanism called custody transfer, where nodes in the network can assume responsibility for retransmitting lost messages. This allows for retransmissions from inside the network rather than having to retransmit data from the source, as is the case with TCP." Hmmm, sounds like DoS just got a whole lot easier. Instead of having to get nasty at an endpoint, you could attack a single router and have everything get all kinds of wonky. I understand why they want to do it this way, but the seperation of responsibility was put there for a reason in TCP waaaaay back in the DARPA days so that if any link goes down you have no data loss. What happens if critical data is being transmitted from a source, and the source gets cut off. The retransmitting router gets hit by a meteor and is trashed. Critical data loss. Am I missing something?

Re:From TFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325011)

If the retransmiter is earth-based, I couldn't care less what happens to the message :-)

Re:From TFA (3, Interesting)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325637)

You seem to be extrapolating quite a bit to say that this scheme is much more vulnerable to critical data loss. (And your claim about DoS is pretty irrelevant when you consider that all implementations of this protocol will be owned by NASA and their associates.)

Do you really think, based on just TFA, that Vint Cerf of all people would design such a flawed protocol? The point of custody transfer is that retransmissions can be handled by the routers that form the network, rather than wasting precious power using a planetside rover that has better things to do.

Re:From TFA (1)

scubamage (727538) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325805)

Given that no other data is given, I really don't have much more to go on. If you do, please share. Yes, the point of custody transfer is that retransmits can be handled by the routers that form the network. But therein lies the problem. When TCP was created the goal was to create a network that could survive a nuclear war. TCP is designed so that if there's no confirmation, the source retransmits. However according to this article the routers handle retransmits. What happens if there is a bit of data that gets transmitted to a router, but the router currently has no other connection point besides the source. It caches that data to be retransmitted as soon as another link is available. However, what if in the meantime that router (the one holding the data in 'custody') gets destroyed or otherwise taken out of commission. What if it gets caught in an ion storm. These are real possibilities. It seems like a very, VERY risky way to do it. Unless of course they're planning to use this as yet another layer which resides somewhere between layers 3 and 4 functions to confirm retransmits from each individual link to the previous link and then ultimately back to the source - which would equate to a LOT of overhead and wasted bandwidth. Unless they're planning to use a connectionless style internetworking protocol, but I doubt that they'd be willing to let data get lost in things this critical.

Re:From TFA (1)

kabocox (199019) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325683)

I understand why they want to do it this way, but the seperation of responsibility was put there for a reason in TCP waaaaay back in the DARPA days so that if any link goes down you have no data loss. What happens if critical data is being transmitted from a source, and the source gets cut off. The retransmitting router gets hit by a meteor and is trashed. Critical data loss. Am I missing something?

Um, if you only have one retransmitting router, then you'll loose your critical connection to that end point if that router ever went down...

A new area awaiting patentification (1)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324737)

The relevant authorities should also be careful, from today itself, to avoid patent-mines in the new protocol suite.

Re:A new area awaiting patentification (4, Funny)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325207)

Citizens of Earth,

It has come to our attention that an earthling called Vint Cerf is making unauthorized use of our work in violation of GPTO (Galactic Patents and Trademarks Office) patent number 0932984720392837409 for Interplanetary Internet Protocol.

We demand that he must immediately cease the use and distribution of our work and that he forwards all copies and relevant documentation to us by the earliest space courier. Failure to do so will result in a lawsuit to the amount of our estimated damages of 1,008,076,123.09 galactic credits (equal to 0.0008 USD).

Very truly yours,

Aliens

P.S Greetings, Dr Mitchell

Re:A new area awaiting patentification (1)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325301)

1,008,076,123.09 galactic credits (equal to 0.0008 USD)

Wow, those Aliens have a pretty crappy economy.

Re:A new area awaiting patentification (2, Funny)

jandrese (485) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325393)

They must have had a 1000 years of space-Bush presidency.

Re:A new area awaiting patentification (1)

znerk (1162519) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326105)

1,008,076,123.09 galactic credits (equal to 0.0008 USD)

Wow, those Aliens have a pretty crappy economy.

Nope, it's the shipping charges that'll get ya.

Re:A new area awaiting patentification (1)

mapsjanhere (1130359) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326167)

well, looks like 1 galactic credit = 1 Zimbabwe dollar

Re:A new area awaiting patentification (1)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326803)

Dear Aliens,

Have you met our representative - Mr Darl McBride?

Now about that technology you stole from us...

Your First Premise Is Wrong, Vint: +1, PatRIOTic (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324769)

The fomer U.S.A. is now the U.nited G.ulags of A.merica.

I hope this helps.

Cheers.
Kilgore T.

Article Pic (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324785)

Holy crap, did anyone notice the pic of the article's author? I'm sure she's a nice, brilliant woman, but she looks like a shoe!

Excellent (2, Funny)

silentcoder (1241496) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324873)

Now we'll be able to send e-mail to Dr Edgar Mitchell's aliens and ask them if they exist !

Great! (1)

mlwmohawk (801821) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324903)

Soon Davidson will be able to spam martians.

In related news ... (4, Funny)

PPH (736903) | more than 6 years ago | (#24324937)

... Comcast moves to block P2P (planet to planet) traffic.

Re:In related news ... (1)

Constantine XVI (880691) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325253)

So what, their Death Star gets in the way too often?

Re:In related news ... (1)

hob42 (41735) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325559)

No, that would be AT&T.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24324979)

I, for one, welcome our porn-browsing outer space robot overlords.

Alien Ascii Pr0n (1)

pseudorand (603231) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325027)

Ya, but I bet it'll be used mostly for pr0n. And I bet the bandwidth will suck too, so we'll just end up with a bunch of ASCII art pictures of naked aliens.

Re:Alien Ascii Pr0n (1)

Wiarumas (919682) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325247)

Those chicks from Mars Colony Alpha Beta Four are into some kinky stuff.

Re:Alien Ascii Pr0n (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24326281)

so we'll just end up with a bunch of ASCII art pictures of naked aliens.

Dude, I would so pay to see that.

Interplanetary ICMP (2, Funny)

kwabbles (259554) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325185)

~$ traceroute voyager2.heliopause.net
traceroute to voyager2.heliopause.net (207.46.193.254), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
  1 192.168.0.15 (192.168.0.15) 0.180 ms 0.186 ms 0.205 ms
  2 netblock.dslcarrier.com (66.159.218.1) 14.379 ms 17.076 ms 20.048 ms
  3 satrptr.spacenet.net (66.51.203.33) 36.531 ms 45.014 ms 42.245 ms
  4 mars.spacenet.net (206.223.143.41) 92.229 ms 101.596 ms 99.575 ms
  5 jupiter.spacenet.net (216.239.43.12) 220.073 ms 266.554 ms 254.288 ms
  6 saturn.spacenet.net (209.85.253.178) 880.760 ms 854.294 ms 878.981 ms
  7 uranus.goatse.net (209.85.251.94) 1233.954 ms 1332.028 ms 1315.059 ms
  8 neptune.spacenet.net (74.125.19.104) 1703.205 ms 1721.652 ms 1733.635 ms
  9 pluto.spacenet.net (73.113.43.11) 2301.311 ms 2435.201 ms 2448.221 ms
10 * * *
11 asteriodb3221.microsoft.com (207.46.191.230) 3411.411 ms 3813.153 ms 3761.314 ms
12 voyager2.heliopause.net (207.46.193.254) 7810.134 ms 7956.324 ms 8103.132 ms

~$

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (1)

exscape (1302123) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325267)

It'll probably take a while before we have superliminal communication, though. ;)

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (1)

kwabbles (259554) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325359)

It'll probably take a while before we have superliminal communication, though. ;)

Bah - shamans have been doing that crap for YEARS.

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (1)

scorp1us (235526) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325441)

Wouldn't we know by now if we're going to ever get superluminal communication? You know, because the signal would travel back in time?

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (1)

kwabbles (259554) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325939)

Wouldn't we know by now if we're going to ever get superluminal communication? You know, because the signal would travel back in time?

I dunno, but Doc said that if a packet travels through time and sees itself in the past, it'll either a) cause a catastrophic disaster within the space-time continuum, or b) pass out.

(Unless it sees itself saving the DeLorean from the Libyans, in which case nothing will happen.)

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (1)

kwabbles (259554) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325479)

BTW - the second after I hit submit on that post, I thought to myself "this is slashdot... some smartass is going to calculate those latency times vs the actual distance of the planets and then make fun of me".

Heheee I love it. :)

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (1)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325769)

I just thought the numbers looked a little low ... (only seconds to Voyager2?)

it'd actually be a bit of a pain, as you'd need the distances between each hop, and I don't have SPICE [nasa.gov] installed on this machine.

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325995)

Man I wish I could afford a faster than light connection like you... Here I am stuck on a legacy electromagnetic link:

~$ ping voyager2.heliopause.net
PING voyager2.heliopause.net (207.46.193.254) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from (207.46.193.254): icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=72877083.5 ms
64 bytes from (207.46.193.254): icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=72877853 ms
64 bytes from (207.46.193.254): icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=72979083.2 ms
64 bytes from (207.46.193.254): icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=72877483.6 ms
64 bytes from (207.46.193.254): icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=72897053.8 ms

--- voyager2.heliopause.net ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 364508557ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 72877083/72901711/72897054/72901711 ms

It took me over 4 days just to run that!

Re:Interplanetary ICMP (1)

kwabbles (259554) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326055)

Man I wish I could afford a faster than light connection like you... Here I am stuck on a legacy electromagnetic link.

It took me over 4 days just to run that!

Get AOL already then.

Cerf is cool (1)

Spassoklabanias (1295839) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325263)

I had the privilege of attending one of his lectures back in 1998 and I can almost remember his entire speech.

He admitted that there aren't enough IP addresses for everyone and his vision included a world where every single device would be connected to the Internet.

He had a great sense of humour as well. I remember him saying: "Imagine a world where everything is connecting to the Internet. You get up in the morning, go to the bathroom, step on the scale and the results are transmitted to your dietist. You take a shower and go to the kitchen to have some breakfast, only to find your fridge being locked up by order of your doctor".

He also pondered how we should cope with the URLs when other plannets enter the game. "Shouldn't we change our emails? Is xxx@yyy.com enough? Or maybe we should add something like .earth or .mars at the end?". That guy is way ahead of his time.

Re:Cerf is cool (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325715)

Yeah, Cerf is amazing. His name itself is pretty cool. However, he is a bit too optimistic about human nature. He needs to be paired up with Bruce Schneier to make sure we don't have pranksters launching Denial of Sustenance attacks against us.

A new meaning to high speed protocol... (1)

pdq332 (849982) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325297)

I wonder if communications sources and sinks are traveling relative to one another at relativistic speeds, would the protocol have to include information about velocity relative to a chosen standard inertial frame? Otherwise you could possibly get weird effects, like sending a Kerberos ticket from a moving spaceship and it would be observed to expire at different times in different frames. Or maybe the communications infrastructure could include a measurement of the redshift of interplanetary communications signals and use that to infer relative velocities and include that with locally generated timestamps - you could call it the Hubble router.

Re:A new meaning to high speed protocol... (1)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325883)

Consider the effects of relativity on GPS [wikipedia.org] satellites. The time skew for a GPS satellite in low earth orbit is about 38 microseconds per 24 hour day. Thus, it isn't hard to imagine that links in an interplanetary network could operate for days without their respective clocks differing by more than a few frame lengths.

In a high-bandwidth link, the routers would probably have to adjust the transmit rates, but timestamps would be a fairly minor issue (and trivially fixed with ntp).

Re:A new meaning to high speed protocol... (1)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325917)

TCP wouldn't, as it's Transport (Layer 4 [wikipedia.org] ). What you talk about would be either Data Link [wikipedia.org] or Physical [wikipedia.org] . (I'm going to assume Physical, as it's dealing with aspects of modulation).

As for needing to compensate for it ... yes [ieee.org] . And it's still [ieee.org] a problem. (And testing [nasa.gov] sucks, too.)

Welcome Alien Overlords! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325379)

This just might lead to final and definitive proof of aliens....I mean think about it, if we build a system of probes, satellites, etc...around our solar system to beam our internet all over the solar system it is bound to leak out of our solar system. By building a network like this stretching all over our solar system those leaks would be considerably closer to possible worlds that might have the technology to receive, decode, translate and respond to our internet chatter....

Re:Welcome Alien Overlords! (1)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326383)

The distance between planets in our solar system are almost unmeasurably miniscule compared to the distances between stars. Earth is already brighter than the Sun in the radio bands due to our chatter (not sure if that's still true due to increasing use of fiber & wired communication).

If the sun were shrunk to be a meter in diameter, Earth would be a dot 200 meters away, Pluto would be a decent 5 mile bike ride away, and the nearest stars would be on the other side of Earth. And the fastest probe we've ever launched, New Horizons, plods along at a bit over 500 meters per year.

MITRE should be all caps (1)

techmuse (160085) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325389)

MITRE (all caps) is the name of the company, not Mitre (in case someone wants to update the original post.)

YUO FAIL ICT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325421)

in space... (4, Funny)

notgm (1069012) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325541)

in space, no one can hear you ping.

Re:in space... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24326137)

in soviet space, ping hears you!

Also appropriate for station wagon full of tapes? (4, Funny)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325551)

"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." -- Andrew S. Tanenbaem, Computer Networks, 4th Ed. p. 91

Hmmmmmm (4, Insightful)

tgd (2822) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325675)

Per byte its probably still a lot cheaper than using SMS.

S.E.L. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24325713)

They could call it Protocol Version 7 [wikipedia.org] .

Interstellar networking (3, Funny)

ckthorp (1255134) | more than 6 years ago | (#24325729)

Interstellar networking: putting the Ether in Ethernet.

The interplanetary distances... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24326435)

Don't the probes we send out to space take "carrier pigeon" like (or greater) amounts of time to communicate with us on Earth anyways? Again the masses of humanity will have to deal with sneaker-net or snail-mail like communication speeds with each other as we venture farther away from our planet. Maybe we will then be forced to put more thought into what we say. Maybe there will be less misunderstanding and rash action. Slashdot would be far less entertaining unless we somehow surpass the currently known limits of communication.

Lag (1)

Codex_of_Wisdom (1222836) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326437)

Thing of the lag times. It's 20 minutes between here and Mars- the nearest planet! Instant messaging would be a long process (and not so "instant"). And forget your MMOs! Where's FTLC when you need it? (for those who don't know, that's Faster Than Light Communication)

Oooh, the possibilities (1)

Karem Lore (649920) | more than 6 years ago | (#24326875)

Just think, the next astronaut could order their Dominos Pizza from the moon, browse porn, download music (doubt is BMA and RIAA will come get you on the moon)...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>