Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The 100-Million Mile Network

Posted by michael on from the long-ping-times dept.

mykepredko writes "eWeek has an article on the network and radio topography of the two Mars rovers and how they communicate with satellites in Mars' orbit as well as the Earth. The article ends by giving four rules for maintaining a space network, a) Automate processes, b) Bulletproof your gear, c) Be persistent and d) Simulate potential problems, which are probably good rules for any network."

6 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Re:wow thanks by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Bulletproof your gear... I was thinking that was a literal understatement :) After all Getting hit bya piece of anything at over 16,000 miles a huor + you should be alot more protetected than just Bullet proof.

    --
    Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
  2. Use OLD technology by NineNine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article seemed to fail to point out that these things are using OLD technologies... UFH? Jesus, that's been around for ages. Their basic data transmission seems to be just that... basic. . No bells and whistles. No wireless garbage. Not super fast. I see failures when people use cutting edge stuff. My business computers need to be ROCK SOLID. I don't use wireless. My hardware uses serial and parallel ports instead of USB/firewire/whatever. I use W2K as a platform. I use an external modem through a parallel port for important credit card stuff.

    I use what has worked reliably for years and years. I'm not gonna risk my business being down because of some stupid gee-whiz technology that's only been out for a few years. Engineers that build solid, reliable, critical systems (financial, medical, avionics) do the same thing.

    1. Re:Use OLD technology by Fastolfe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I don't disagree with you, suggesting that UHF was chosen because it's "old" and proven isn't really accurate. There are only so many ways you can communicate with a lander on another planet (that we know of), and things like whiz-bang 802.11 aren't really appropriate.

      Incidentally, the real "technology" decisions here would probably revolve around the data protocols themselves, not necessarily the choice of the radio band. Lots of new technologies use the same radio bands we've used for years. Higher isn't always better.

    2. Re:Use OLD technology by petabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, we had a trinitron here that lasted 13 years before we replaced it. This monitor is a trinitron tube.

      I've had 2 power supplies go on me in the last 5 years and one deathstar (shh, I'm still using its RMA brother). But some of the first computer equipment I bought (a 1.2 gig WD drive and a 2.5 WD drive) to put in my dad's computer both died on me. Computer stuff is weird; it lasts 90 days or 9 years. Now everyone is ditching their p2's because "they're too slow" and I'm building a nice cluster.

      These days, I just try to buy things when they're towards the bottom end of the price spectrum (refurbs, selling because its "too slow", etc) because then if it does die, I'm not upset. I also now have 4 machines - 3 slower, 1 fast so I have a backup.

  3. The router analogy by GPLDAN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think that Spirit should be considered a big win for NASA. They patched a software bug on a platform that had corrupted flash, basically having to reinstall portions of operating code.
    Something about the repairing a 747 while it is in flight analogy.
    It may not be as dramatic as the rescue of Apollo 13, but they should be commended for well though out design principles, instead of just taking cheap shots at them when something fails as most people are wont to do.

    1. Re:The router analogy by BookRead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, indeed. I was struck at how similiar to a garden-variety remote system administration problem it was and how well they had designed the rover and planned its fallbacks to solve it. Very, very nicely done NASA. I'm beginning to believe the robot guys can do it better than the human spaceflight guys. I'm also hoping it trickles down to the hardware we have to manage everyday.