What difference can content-aware forward erasure correction have on latency, when the content being delivered is designed to be received in order? A great deal.

All Steinwurf’s ECC/FEC algorithms utilize SIMD acceleration with run-time detection of the CPU capabilities. This means the same binary can run on multiple different CPUs and automatically utilize the fastest SIMD acceleration available.

We will show how using an erasure correcting code/Forward Erasure correction (ECC/FEC) can lead to significant bandwidth savings over a traditional retransmission based system.

This week IETF 109 is being held as a virtual online conference (the IETF is the standardization organization for the protocols used on the Internet).

In this post we will compare two algorithms, namely Rely and Reed-Solomon. Rely is a sliding window based RLNC algorithm, whereas Reed-Solomon is based on a classical Vandermonde matrix construction.

We just released version 2 of our “Rely” solution which implements modern ECC/FEC to allow low-latency and efficient recovery of packet loss e.g. for video streaming or other latency sensitive applications.

Steinwurf has developed and improved coding of VPN / SD WAN traffic based on RLNC using forward erasure correcting codes.

California-based Barracuda Networks and Denmark-based Steinwurf ApS announce an OEM relationship to use Steinwurf’s Kodo Software libraries to add Erasure Correcting Codes (ECC) with the Barracuda CloudGen Firewall.

Steinwurf are very grateful and proud to announce that the Innovation Fund Denmark have decided to help fund the next phase of OTAcast development.

Some wireless devices are only meant to receive data, and are not able or allowed to send back information to the network using a wireless return channel. In this post we look at how and why OTAcast is a great solution in such cases.

Picking the right erasure correcting code (ECC) for a specific application is a challenging task. Different codes and implementations have different properties and characteristics. In this document we compare two popular ECC choices: the RLNC (Random Linear Network Codes) family of codes and RaptorQ.

OTAcast supports gigabyte file sizes and up to 1000s of receivers over a unidirectional link (multicast/broadcast).

We are delighted to include Evologics GmbH, experts in underwater communication, as a licensee of our cutting edge Kodo Software.

In most Geostationary (GEO) satellite constellations, updating many ground terminals has generally been onerous. OTAcast solves this problem efficiently.

The ability to update content (e.g. firmware) in IoT and other satellite connected ground devices is a necessity to keep offering competitive features to customers and for bug-fixing and improvements.

In our previous post, we talked about how multicast using erasure coding provides an efficient way of ensuring over-the-air file delivery solution. In this post we will compare two solutions to the file update problem.

Satellite connected devices will from time to time need software updates, updates to built-in maps, updated weather maps, updated ice maps, updates to AI-models for feature extraction, new videos and TV-shows for crew welfare programs etc. Updates, that are common to a population of devices or users.

These benchmarks were run by Steinwurf ApS to measure the performance of the Kodo erasure coding library implementing Random Linear Network Coding (RLNC) codecs.