1. Overview and Rational

The following quality of service levels are available: Concorde, First, Business, and Coach. Concorde class offers expedited data delivery. One major benefit to using Avian Carriers is that this is the only networking technology that earns frequent flyer miles, plus the Concorde and First classes of service earn 50% bonus miles per packet. Ostriches are an alternate carrier that have much greater bulk transfer capability but provide slower delivery, and require the use of bridges between domains.

The service level is indicated on a per-carrier basis by bar-code markings on the wing. One implementation strategy is for a bar-code reader to scan each carrier as it enters the router and then enqueue it in the proper queue, gated to prevent exit until the proper time. The carriers may sleep while enqueued.

For secure networks, carriers may have classes Prime or Choice. Prime carriers are self-keying when using public key encryption. Some distributors have been known to falsely classify Choice carriers as Prime.

Packets MAY be marked for deletion using RED paint while enqueued.

Weighted fair queueing (WFQ) MAY be implemented using scales, as shown:

                                                  __
                                  _____/-----\   / o\
                                 <____   _____\_/    >--
                 +-----+              \ /    /______/
                 | 10g |               /|:||/
                 +-----+              /____/|
                 | 10g |                    |
                 +-----+          ..        X
               ===============================
                              ^
                              |
                          =========

Carriers in the queue too long may leave log entries, as shown on the scale.

The following is a plot of traffic shaping, from coop-erative host sites.

        Alt |       Plot of Traffic Shaping showing carriers in flight
            |
         2k |           ....................
            |          .                    .
            |         .                      .
         1k |        .                        .
            |   +---+                          +---+
            |   | A |                          | B |
            |   +---+                          +---+
            |_____________________________________________

Avian carriers normally bypass bridges and tunnels but will seek out worm hole tunnels. When carrying web traffic, the carriers may digest the spiders, leaving behind a more compact representation. The carriers may be confused by mirrors.

Round-robin queueing is not recommended. Robins make for well-tuned networks but do not support the necessary auto-homing feature.

A BOF was held at the last IETF but only Avian Carriers were allowed entry, so we don't know the results other than we're sure they think MPLS is great. Our attempts at attaching labels to the carriers have been met with resistance.

NATs are not recommended either -- as with many protocols, modifying the brain-embedded IP addresses is difficult, plus Avian Carriers MAY eat the NATs.

Encapsulation may be done with saran wrappers. Unintentional encapsulation in hawks has been known to occur, with decapsulation being messy and the packets mangled.

Loose source routes are a viable evolutionary alternative enhanced standards-based MSWindows-compliant technology, but strict source routes MUST NOT be used, as they are a choke-point.

The ITU has offered the IETF formal alignment with its corresponding technology, Penguins, but that won't fly.

Multicasting is supported, but requires the implementation of a clone device. Carriers may be lost if they are based on a tree as it is being pruned. The carriers propagate via an inheritance tree. The carriers have an average TTL of 15 years, so their use in expanding ring searches is limited.

Additional quality of service discussion can be found in a Michelin's guide.