57 ms·

At least there was a technical reason, even if it no longer makes sense. The ATM[1] protocol has a packet size of 48 bytes. Why? Because the US wanted 64 and fr

by thayne 3y ago

At least there was a technical reason, even if it no longer makes sense. The ATM[1] protocol has a packet size of 48 bytes. Why? Because the US wanted 64 and france wanted 32. So a compromise was made that pleased no one and the standard used the average of the two, which of course isn't a power of 2. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asynchronous_Transfer_Mode https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asynchronous_Transfer_Mode

cquintana92 3y ago
48 bytes which doesn't include the header, which was decided to be 5 bytes because it was "around 10% of the body", making it... 53.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  I'd loved to be in the room when those decisions were made. I can almost imagine some arbiter hearing the arguments from both sides, and then, to the horror of everyone, deciding that if they can't agree on a common value, they'll have to meet half-way. OTOH, skimming the Wikipedia article, it seems to me that overhead in that system was proportional to message length, so perhaps length of 53 bytes was still meaningfully better than 64 bytes.
  - masfuerte 3y ago
    It's an old story. One side should have renounced their claim rather than live with the abomination, and then the arbiter could have chosen their proposal as the one true packet size. The arbiter's wisdom would have been celebrated for millennia.
netmare 3y ago
That's like a programming language with 0.5-based array indexing.
- n4r9 3y ago
  It's the classic "off by half" index bug.
  - BizarroLand 3y ago
    Doing the mental math is a lot harder, too. Any halfway decent computer nerd knows on some level that 2^10=1024, but 1/2^10=0.0009765625. Doesn't quite lock into the memory banks so easily.
- brookst 3y ago
  No fence post problems if you just put each post in the middle of each span!
- MawKKe 3y ago
  Don't give people ideas https://gist.github.com/MawKKe/1fafc1f4a5eb79ed654cf0567c284651 https://gist.github.com/MawKKe/1fafc1f4a5eb79ed654cf0567c284...

by thayne 3y ago

cquintana92 3y ago

48 bytes which doesn't include the header, which was decided to be 5 bytes because it was "around 10% of the body", making it... 53.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
I'd loved to be in the room when those decisions were made. I can almost imagine some arbiter hearing the arguments from both sides, and then, to the horror of everyone, deciding that if they can't agree on a common value, they'll have to meet half-way. OTOH, skimming the Wikipedia article, it seems to me that overhead in that system was proportional to message length, so perhaps length of 53 bytes was still meaningfully better than 64 bytes.
- masfuerte 3y ago
  It's an old story. One side should have renounced their claim rather than live with the abomination, and then the arbiter could have chosen their proposal as the one true packet size. The arbiter's wisdom would have been celebrated for millennia.

netmare 3y ago

That's like a programming language with 0.5-based array indexing.

n4r9 3y ago
It's the classic "off by half" index bug.
- BizarroLand 3y ago
  Doing the mental math is a lot harder, too. Any halfway decent computer nerd knows on some level that 2^10=1024, but 1/2^10=0.0009765625. Doesn't quite lock into the memory banks so easily.
brookst 3y ago
No fence post problems if you just put each post in the middle of each span!
MawKKe 3y ago
Don't give people ideas https://gist.github.com/MawKKe/1fafc1f4a5eb79ed654cf0567c284651 https://gist.github.com/MawKKe/1fafc1f4a5eb79ed654cf0567c284...