Slashdot Mirror

While likely related, Martin Burnicki posted a more detailed explanation of the actual event to the time-nuts mailing list:

https://www.febo.com/pipermail...

(source)

There was no glitch in GPS time, but one satellite was transmitting bad GPS/UTC difference information.

GPS time is not quite UTC time. Each satellite transmits the necessary translation factors along with other housekeeping information. One factor is the number of leap seconds and the time of the next change. The other is a linear function (with an offset parameter A0 and a slope A1) that specifies a precision offset.

Normally, A0 is tiny, but one satellite broadcast a bogus A0 value of 13.7 us. Any receiver that believed it would then jump its UTC output by the same amount, leading to the glitch.

A receiver that used GPS time (all GPS receivers have an option to not apply UTC corrections to their PPS output) would not have seen a glitch.

It looks like the actual problem was a bad data upload; Specifically, some satellites were transmitting incorrect parameters for UTC offset correction. https://www.febo.com/pipermail... is the posting from a gentlemen at Meinberg that has the details. http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/... has more information about the time offset parameters (A0 and A1) and how they interact with GPS and UTC time.

According to another message (https://www.febo.com/pipermail/time-nuts/2016-January/095686.html), PRNs 2, 6, 7, 9, and 23 got hit. It is interesting to note that the satellite that was taken out of service this morning (PRN 32) is not in this list. It looks like the decommissioning of PRN32 was quite possibly scheduled (see http://gpsworld.com/last-block...), and even if not, a failure of that specific satellite could not have caused multiple satellites to start broadcasting incorrect offset data.

I'm really looking forward to the postmortem on this.

What do they expect. Everyone is getting screwed by ISP's and government laws. With radio all you need is friends.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_multimedia_radio

http://www.febo.com/hamdocs/intronos.html

Funny you mention this, I have thought of buying a ham radio for that very reason. I already have deep cycle batteries and a generator ;-))

We could even run tcp/ip over ham radio and set up an emergency network to enable data transfer in case the internet becomes unavailable ! :

http://www.febo.com/hamdocs/intronos.html

I think that this is what you're looking for.

Or this. I've been actively supporting the work done by the People First Network (specifically their efforts to get a similar project up and running in neighbouring Vanuatu) for years now. PFNet has a network of dozens of HF radio stations transmitting email to the farthest reaches that lacks even the most basic infrastructure.

The service they provide is essential, even saving lives occasionally. When a 7.0 earthquake caused a tsunami in one remote area of the Solomons, PFNet staff were the first to generate casualty and damage reports, accompanied by photos and other documentary evidence. Thanks to their early warning, people downstream of the tsunami received a warning in time to move to higher ground.

However, I think setting up WiFi-based 'grid networks' in developing countries is a great idea, but as others have mentioned, what those countries really need is a lot more basic than WiFi.

Actually, there are few more basic needs than communications. I've been writing a weekly column on the topic for a little over 2 years now, looking at the issue of communications in the South Pacific region. The more I look at the issue, the more I realise that, especially in places where infrastructure (both political and physical) is lacking, poor communications slows everything down.

Access to information and the ability to share knowledge makes everything easier. I'm currently helping one project to build and repair roads throughout the country. One of their first prerequisites was ensuring that they'd have good communications between their work crews and the capital. Solutions like this networ-in-a-box are exactly on the mark. They serve a critical need.

If you address the problems of warlords/dictators and ethnic cleansing, corrupt governments, etc, those countries will build their own Internet infrastructure.

Let's ignore warlords for the moment, because about 90% of the developing world doesn't have to deal with them. As far as corrupt politicians are concerned, well... everyone has them. Everyone. In the country where I live, the biggest problem is that the MP gets elected, disappears to the capital for 4 years, and only reappears at election time. If people could actually keep in touch with him, they might be able to actually get some representation from him. Without communications, though, it's just 'out of sight, out of mind.'

Building awareness about what constitutes real political ability, enabling more principled candidates to learn the tools of their craft and - most importantly of all - enabling a dialogue with constituents scattered across large tracts of difficult terrain... all of this requires better communications than we have at the moment.

It's just a matter of having a stable economy

Not to nit-pick, but it's a matter of building a stable economy, and that doesn't happen without improved communications. Internet is the horse, and it's helping to pull the economic cart.

I expect that 'the Internet' for developing countries will first come in the form of digital cell phone networks, then expand from there.)

That's exactly what we've done here, anyway.

I think that this is what you're looking for. Well, sort of anyhow. The problem is, that amateur radio is only supposed to be used for non-commercial purposes, so people can't access the 'general' Internet via Ham Radio (adverts, commercial sites, etc). Also, that link is, I think, somewhat dated - it discusses tcp/ip as a totally seperated system from the O/S. I think there are now Amateur TCP/IP implementations that integrate with the native O/S TCP/IP stacks, so that you could use any program that you would use with the 'commercial' Internet, with the Ham Internet.

But, my point is, the technology to do TCP/IP over radio has, of course, been there for a long time. Shortwave radio, I'll warn you, is only good for very slow (think modem speeds, and even slower, depending on the band - 300bps to maybe 9600bps (I suppose if you were operating outside the Ham bands, in your own chunk of shortwave frequencies, you could maybe go faster, but dont' expect broadband speeds).

However, I think setting up WiFi-based 'grid networks' in developing countries is a great idea, but as others have mentioned, what those countries really need is a lot more basic than WiFi. If you address the problems of warlords/dictators and ethnic cleansing, corrupt governments, etc, those countries will build their own Internet infrastructure. It's just a matter of having a stable economy (it might take a few years, while those countries are developing the more basic parts of the economy -bfood, transportation, clothing and other basic manufactured goods, resources like timber, coal, concrete, etc, but once enough people have enough 'disposable' income, then Internet services should have no problem in those countries - I expect that 'the Internet' for developing countries will first come in the form of digital cell phone networks, then expand from there.)