[HN Gopher] IP over Spaghetti (2019)
___________________________________________________________________
IP over Spaghetti (2019)
Author : elisaado
Score : 184 points
Date : 2023-12-22 10:56 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| brudgers wrote:
| A noodlie appendage to the internet?
| BirAdam wrote:
| Just a suggestion, but when speaking of Him, you should
| probably capitalize Noodly Appendage... I mean, you're not
| wrong, but it's better ;)
| pantantrant wrote:
| Oops, I dropped my packets.
| blueflow wrote:
| Previously: ADSL over wet thread
| https://hackaday.com/2017/12/14/adsl-robustness-verified-by-...
| BadBadJellyBean wrote:
| Why? Because why not!
| samschooler wrote:
| Expanded internet access. Most homes in Sicily as well as
| around Naples, Italy are still wired using mainly spaghetti and
| in some cases linguine, as was standard until 1956.
| _joel wrote:
| It's a bad situation with over farming in some areas since
| the 50's[1], I'm glad to see the spaghetti reserves are
| returning.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVo_wkxH9dU
| sprior wrote:
| Well since according to that old ad pasta grows on trees it'll
| be a really cheap networking media.
| dvh wrote:
| We've been asking for sauce
| fellerts wrote:
| I recently did something similar - tunneled IP over an RF
| protocol that was definitely not designed for such nonsense, and
| was convinced that PPP would be a much more appropriate link
| protocol. It even handles IP address assignment and encryption
| out of the box.
|
| Was SLIP chosen for its simplicity here? Genuinely curious.
| NoToP wrote:
| Packet ravioli
| accrual wrote:
| Surely with an adapter this setup could indeed support 802.3
| Ravioli.
| ggambetta wrote:
| Impressive! But I'm contractually obligated to point out that
| "spaghetti" is plural and "spaghettis" is not a thing.
| quasarj wrote:
| It sounds funnier, though
| ggambetta wrote:
| Silly hobbitses and their spaghettises, we hates them
| thriftwy wrote:
| In ADOM you could wish for "seven league bootses" if you
| wanted to get multiple pairs.
| airstrike wrote:
| Giusto! And "spaghetto" is not really a thing either but I love
| saying it when I mean a singular "noodle"
| reddalo wrote:
| "Spaghetto" is completely a real thing, in Italian at least!
|
| "Uno spaghetto" (one), "due spaghetti" (two) and so on...
| airstrike wrote:
| Certo, ma intendevo che la gente di solito non usa quella
| parola lol
|
| or at least not to my knowledge! I'm not Italian
| kazinator wrote:
| If there were a girl spaghetta, what would the plural be?
| airstrike wrote:
| spaghette, like "le nostre pizze" is the plural of "la
| nostra pizza" (our pizza):
|
| https://www.google.com/maps/place/Campana+d'Oro/@46.06437
| 1,1...
| dizhn wrote:
| Similar to lasagna vs lasagne except the former incorrect
| version is used in most English speaking countries.
| sunnybeetroot wrote:
| Yes it is a real thing.
| dclowd9901 wrote:
| I believe the plural is spaghettipodes
| airstrike wrote:
| My money is on spaghettii
| Cockbrand wrote:
| That's two, and three are spaghetiii. Careful with counting
| one more, that'll be spaghettiv, of course.
| sneak wrote:
| Five is right out.
| drooby wrote:
| Spaghettx is also the gender non-binary usage. Which
| makes this counting system slightly problematic.
| lostlogin wrote:
| This is dangerously close to the octopi/octopodes/octopuses
| debate.
| asylteltine wrote:
| Actually it's not spaghetti unless it comes from the spaghetti
| region of France.
| jagged-chisel wrote:
| Probably on the border shared with Italy.
| bpye wrote:
| Switzerland actually - https://youtu.be/8scpGwbvxvI
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| spaghetti noodle might do as a singular?
|
| or strand?
| thewarpaint wrote:
| For the curious: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/spaghetti
|
| I had a chuckle when I read the plural "spaghetties".
| nosrepa wrote:
| Submit a PR then?
| wiredfool wrote:
| This really needs to be part of the it's not stupid if it works
| thread.
| londons_explore wrote:
| With a ping of 60,000 milliseconds and a 0.00004 Mbit/s data
| rate, I question the use of the term "works".
| wiredfool wrote:
| Works on my plate.
| heads wrote:
| Each packet is a whole meal -- usually 1500 bites!
|
| Also, if you find plain spaghetti too bland then bites 12 through
| 15 give you the sauce address.
|
| https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/IPv4_Pac...
| xattt wrote:
| Another tip: if the box rattles, throw it away!
| hunter2_ wrote:
| Might also help to use Tomato [0].
|
| [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomato_(firmware)
| nicexe wrote:
| Looks like a deconstructed optocoupler while also using an
| optocoupler.
|
| This is one of these rare instances where you can have hardware
| recursion.
| seiferteric wrote:
| Took me a bit to see what it was actually doing. In the doc
| folder it has some pictures. It appears to be sort of a linear
| actuator that pushes the spaghetti forward or backward, which
| makes/breaks the light path in the optical sensor on the other
| side.
| yonatan8070 wrote:
| Oh
|
| I didn't read beyond the README and I thought it's using the
| sphagetti as a fiber optic cable with an LED on one side and
| a photoresistor on the other
| winwang wrote:
| Time for SSH over airgap ;)
|
| "Channel Capacity of Short-Range Ultrasonic Communications in
| Air" https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8089735
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-gap_malware
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| Was the code spaghetti? Guess it might be copy pasta. Actually I
| think he used his noodle to come up with this.
| eszed wrote:
| Glad to see this is open sauce.
| eternityforest wrote:
| I wonder what the bandwidth of tin cans and string is
| ubutler wrote:
| Would someone mind explaining, for people who aren't familiar
| with electrical engineering and/or physics, is it actually
| possible to transmit information over spaghetti or this is just a
| very elaborate April-but-not-in-April fools joke?
| mod50ack wrote:
| It is actually possible. It is possible to transmit information
| by moving a thing (which is sensed by the optical sensor, as
| shown here). So we can transmit information by moving
| spaghetti. It is not a particularly efficient method, though.
| LukeShu wrote:
| It's both. Obviously, it's a silly April-but-not-in-April fools
| joke; but it also seems that it would work (but not be
| practical).
|
| The spaghetti is just a stick. At one end a relay[1] wiggles
| the strand of spaghetti to transmit information. At the other
| end an optical sensor[2] sees the tip of the strand of
| spaghetti wiggling and receives that information. There's such
| a setup going in each direction[3] so that each side can
| receive and transmit.
|
| [1]:
| https://github.com/peterheinrich/InternetOverSpaghetti/blob/...
| (the strand of spaghetti that stick going off the screen to the
| right)
|
| [2]:
| https://github.com/peterheinrich/InternetOverSpaghetti/blob/...
|
| [3]:
| https://github.com/peterheinrich/InternetOverSpaghetti/blob/...
| ikari_pl wrote:
| When I saw the title, and the picture, my thought chain was
| going fast!
|
| * Is it electrical? No, impossible, dry spaghetti is not a good
| conductor
|
| * Is it optical? It could make sense, maybe spaghetti behaves
| like an optic fiber, trapping the reflections inside?
|
| * Oh my god, it's mechanical!
|
| So what happens here is, there's a relay (electromechanical
| device) modified to be able to poke a metal rod when a signal
| is applied.
|
| This rod pokes the spaghetti.
|
| The receiving end watches the end of the spaghetti for movement
| - with an optical sensor. When it moves back, more light will
| get through the sensor, than when spaghetti is in the way. So
| the bits are represented by physical movement back and forth of
| the spaghetti noodle (is noodle a correct term here?).
| gwbas1c wrote:
| I would have liked to know a bit more: How does it work and how
| many bits / second?
| vincent-manis wrote:
| This is brilliant! I would be interested in reading an analysis
| of IP performance in this kind of pasta-net versus using homing
| pigeons (RFC 1149/2549).
| jurgenaut23 wrote:
| I can't help to wonder how the bitrate would vary with how cooked
| they are. Finally one way to settle the debate about what's
| really "al dente".
| userbinator wrote:
| This made me wonder how well spaghetti transmits sound waves, and
| if higher speeds could be obtained by that means.
| ikari_pl wrote:
| While solids are transmitting sound waves much _faster_ than
| air, spaghetti is also very prone to mechanical destruction. A
| dense metal rod would do better, but at the cost of requiring
| more actuation force.
| lambdaone wrote:
| I'm not sure why the ping time is ~60 seconds.
|
| Reading the Arduino firmware suggests a data rate of 40 bits/s on
| the actual spaghetti strand.
|
| Allowing for a start and stop bit, that's 4 bytes/second. Given a
| typical ping packet length of 56 bytes, and a negligble SLIP
| encapsulation overhead, I'd expect the outbound ping request
| would take 14 seconds to transmit, and the ping reply would take
| another 14 seconds after that, making 28 seconds in total (plus
| the processing latency, which should be negligible). The only way
| I can see it taking twice that time would be if the ping packets
| had truly unfortunate content of bytes that SLIP would need to
| escape into byte pairs, which seems unlikely.
|
| I'm surprised the author didn't go for direct transmission of a
| 9600 baud signal; it wouldn't be too hard to use a DIY voice coil
| actuator to drive sound waves down the spaghetti at that
| frequency, and not too much DSP processing to amplify and clean
| up the measured movement at the optical sensor into a clean
| digital signal.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-12-24 23:02 UTC)