Skip to main content

Timeline for Must TCP use IP?

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

16 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Aug 3, 2015 at 23:25 comment added barlop @RBerteig +1 good find, and it's a webpage from the same website as the wikipedia reference so the wikipedia reference was legit.
Aug 3, 2015 at 22:48 comment added RBerteig @barlop Here's at least one user group that claims to have done the stunt, with logs, detailed accounts from multiple parties, and photos of the actual birds involved. Of course it was a stunt, and not in the least bit practical. But it is the kind of stunt that appeals to the same kind of people that would write the IFC as a joke so I always found it plausible that someone could have gone and done it.
Aug 3, 2015 at 1:19 comment added barlop @RBerteig It's far from fact that TCP over pigeon was implemented.. The RFC was an april fools joke, and the link wikipedia gives for its "implementation" is just a short blog post on some site with no pictures about implementing the RFC. Very likely a joke, because if somebody had implemented something as bizarre as IP over pigeons even on a small scale, and wanted to write about it, they'd have at least taken pictures of the spectacle or written in more detail. And no names are given there for who did it. It's titled with the words "informal report". I wouldn't trust it.
Jul 18, 2012 at 1:04 comment added SilverbackNet A company or two made TCP over IPX drivers way back when, before IPX completely died. (Or was it SPX over IP?) IPX was basically identical to IP aside from the particulars of the header bits, so there was no reason it couldn't work. You could easily define a PCP (postcard protocol), utilizing USPS addresses and segmenting based on whatever fits on the back, and run TCP over that.
Jul 18, 2012 at 0:24 comment added RBerteig On bandwidth vs. latency: Back in the day we used to observe that it was really hard to beat the bandwidth supplied by a truck load of 9-track tape reels. Today, a single envelope with an SDHC card eclipses that by many orders of magnitude. But in both cases, the latency is pretty high. On the other hand, stunts have been done showing that a courier (or even a bird) and a card easily beats most network connections for large file transfers.
Jul 17, 2012 at 15:01 comment added squillman Would have to have some seriously large holes in the firewall to allow avian carriers through.
Jul 17, 2012 at 14:33 comment added kinokijuf @RBerteig On the other hand, FTP over avian carriers might be practical.
Jul 17, 2012 at 12:30 comment added user @kmkaplan I wasn't aware that RFC 1149 interoperability was a requirement.
Jul 17, 2012 at 11:33 comment added nalply @all Creative thinking outside all boxes :-)
Jul 17, 2012 at 11:12 comment added Jon Hanna @kmkaplan Unless the datagram was printed on the label of the SDHC card. It's like the cliché from several films - "oh, it's actually ON the harddrive!"
Jul 17, 2012 at 10:26 history edited Joey CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 10 characters in body
Jul 17, 2012 at 9:43 comment added kmkaplan @MichaelKjörling This would not interoperate with RFC 1149: “The IP datagram is printed, on a small scroll of paper”.
Jul 17, 2012 at 6:33 comment added user About RBerteig's comment; consider a carrier pigeon carrying a mini-SDHC card. There's the difference between latency and throughput. :-)
Jul 17, 2012 at 1:36 comment added RBerteig IP itself has been implemented over many network technologies, even carrier pigeons. The birds were actually used to demonstrate delivery of ICMP Ping packets, with a 55% packet loss (apparently due to operator error) and latencies ranging from one to two hours. It would be possible to run TCP on top of that, but the connection setup would require a lot of birds....
Jul 16, 2012 at 20:42 vote accept Pacerier
Oct 29, 2015 at 18:55
Jul 16, 2012 at 20:31 history answered LawrenceC CC BY-SA 3.0