1993-10-09 - Re: distributed autonomous networks

Header Data

From: wcs@anchor.ho.att.com (Bill_Stewart_HOY0021305)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: fd8007d33cfd66911ef35889b805854fb5cac30c4b21567f8ff311663e85c543
Message ID: <9310090005.AA11624@anchor.ho.att.com>
Reply To: _N/A

UTC Datetime: 1993-10-09 00:05:48 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 8 Oct 93 17:05:48 PDT

Raw message

From: wcs@anchor.ho.att.com (Bill_Stewart_HOY002_1305)
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 93 17:05:48 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: distributed autonomous networks
Message-ID: <9310090005.AA11624@anchor.ho.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Obviously, if we do a radio solution, the equipment ought to be attached
to cans marked W.A.S.T.E  :-)

At least in the US, you don't have to pirate radio frequencies;
there are a few bands that are available for uncensored low-power use,
though some of them may require spread-spectrum.

Meteor Burst is real stuff, though the last time I knew a little about it
the bandwidth was pretty low; e.g. you got 300 baud average throughput
doing bursts of 4800 baud with really heavy-duty forward error correction,
since it's a pretty sporadic medium.  Power usage is really low,
and typical applications are things like telemetry from snow-depth recorders
out in the mountains, where line-of-sight is essentially unavailable.
I don't know how much bandwidth or area you get out of it, or how traceable
it is - our meteor expert retired years ago, and was looking at problems like
how to build radio data networks that weren't bothered by nuclear explosions.

If there's a spare satellite slot available, ALOHANET technology is a reasonably
efficient way to use it.





Thread