From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 063BA3CB37 for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 13:12:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40E5A3898D; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 13:12:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id V8STMqlApkVF; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 13:12:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8284D38988; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 13:12:43 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1717693963; bh=S56G9dhCKNli8PO2hjn3WR1B74viMsjb2MJTAEJRHZk=; h=From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=SDFw/lOAivNeyuxnw/xk+FM0xazt1HNs6KCmqk9VrsENN0wArfqpQUkBOYl6z10u/ tBZAIWL3aKNYZAKNnFpyziqX9tBv0c4nOsYe0W1nkWh0lvOoJQGWsKDr+VHXjOwIxq 2GUJ6WsCg6jeumbEcaPh/+8jiC/EbTN5hi49RTXw6cXpvYHzaKapfiXbrkEKtQhgrR WsRo3mK9/lsHhNydyIEnf5JGMWkuIDfhENK4PVx32My+hQkAlJojzfi3n595pQWLLw HrDk3xsjUo1g/e2MHxFSb7f23o6vdveO+acgEimN+C260qX4QWUb2idujA/OG2X9af zpmbp2RQtYMEQ== Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DFC452; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 13:12:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: =?us-ascii?Q?=3D=3FUTF-8=3FQ=3FDavid=5FFern=3DC3=3DA1ndez=3F=3D?= , Vint Cerf cc: starlink In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.8+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 17:12:45 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Vint Cerf via Starlink wrote: > I hope you all realize that quantum entanglement does NOT facilitate > FTL communication. I got a book last month for my birthday: https://app.thestorygraph.com/books/99c04ecc-8cda-44ea-addf-1b19cd934ab8 Black Holes, by Brian Cox, Jeff Forshaw. It's very good. The style reminds me greatly of a book a read as a pre-teen: Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics, Gary Zukav which eventually led me to a degree in physics. I didn't know about Penrose Diagram's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_diagram until this book. The book explains quite clearly why entanglement can't be used for communication. At one point, when we were trying to mix DNSSEC and IPsec in FreeS/SWAN's opportunistic encryption, we realized that DNS record (changes) propogate with a kind of maximum speed, akin to a speed of TTL. But, IPsec IKE connections are a bit like workholes, and if they beat the DNS change across the Internet, then things can fail. Alas, my wormhole explanation fell flat. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQFFBAEBCgAvFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAmZh7gsRHG1jckBzYW5k ZWxtYW4uY2EACgkQgItw+93Q3WV3bgf9EJc7v3yolBVZ2Yb6dw7PWrfbBA7SlSu3 77Kc301UxgASG3Vx100JvkQ9awumWi+CFkIjjEwTNPqmRPukRlri4TR5pNyh21VQ IaCbAm4pB4Tc3XW1yFzXQF3/4QNyQmP8xCOktNRTbc07zBpGacFbeBofnx6mPxz4 +zYq52THFmIfvz547uH90qXKphn5iLObJrjmT0Xqz9z3HxN4YicdeZW7+5yBU+3M kIUnTJ++CiTynYx5pg0jcs2B+PJxI8DmAly8Fane87RXoYI8XbMu9bjAfJZlhbWS lxPhbaha7WYUvWPqTMNzF0bNCGhTSkKeLwlpVC1u2PqErURUPsY/Xw== =1/Q7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--