Lloyd Wood wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Lloyd Wood wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 10:33:25 -0700
From: Randy Bush <randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com>
To: Lloyd Wood <l(_dot_)wood(_at_)eim(_dot_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk>
Subject: RE: Carrier Class Gateway
There's some discussion of Panama requirements in 'The New New Thing'.
Not just a lock, but there's a bridge to worry about; passing under it
at low tide is your height limit.
i would imagine the problem would be at high, not low, tide.
oops. mea culpa.
actually, not mea culpa. if you're willing to wait for low tide before
passing through, you can build a slightly taller boat...
Actually, I'm surprised nobody's yet raised the issue of fragmenting the
payload in transit and the effect this will have on traffic throughput.
As modeled so far, this seems to be an interesting case where if you
reduce the size of the payload you actually decrease throughput, since
the ship will ride higher in the water, at high *or* low tide. At the
same time, you will need to know both ship height and loaded draft to
predict channel capacity and its ability to carry a given payload
without fragmentation. Obviously, we will need to consider both channel
capacity and maximum payload size of the transport layer to properly
model traffic here...
- peterd
L.
size does matter.
<L(_dot_)Wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Deutsch work email: pdeutsch(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com
Director of Engineering
Edge Delivery Products
Content Networking Business Unit private: pdeutsch(_at_)earthlink(_dot_)net
Cisco Systems
"There are only three types of mathematician
- those who can count and those who can't."
----------------------------------------------------------------------