From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp92.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (smtp92.iad3a.emailsrvr.com [173.203.187.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04E693B29D for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:03:17 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=g001.emailsrvr.com; s=20190322-9u7zjiwi; t=1591891396; bh=HpzTVuv5jEqu/D3QwRpOWIjUEBMLwHMqseq3Gm6beCE=; h=Date:Subject:From:To:From; b=du2tL7CY+5i5p3DaA81atKHZ6IKZhieVB+vOrMqS6OR0OkNf3ZUB1qS1uOC+r/2LN pDFj10OJFIRHDppEn3PpyHtyBAukldoALsTNYIZaU8NnBhbS8HUWCUHyMOnuIRN9IU ihfJmkYBQxmAu0UEcU0IB3sHqqN+lwEJzPhhGpgs= Received: from app54.wa-webapps.iad3a (relay-webapps.rsapps.net [172.27.255.140]) by smtp36.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 7DD77543A; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:03:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Id: dpreed@deepplum.com Received: from app54.wa-webapps.iad3a (relay-webapps.rsapps.net [172.27.255.140]) by 0.0.0.0:25 (trex/5.7.12); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:03:16 -0400 Received: from deepplum.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by app54.wa-webapps.iad3a (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C8EE004D; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:03:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by apps.rackspace.com (Authenticated sender: dpreed@deepplum.com, from: dpreed@deepplum.com) with HTTP; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:03:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Auth-ID: dpreed@deepplum.com Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:03:16 -0400 (EDT) From: "David P. Reed" To: "Dave Taht" Cc: "bloat" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_20200611120316000000_80440" Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Type: html Message-ID: <1591891396.41838464@apps.rackspace.com> X-Mailer: webmail/17.3.12-RC X-Classification-ID: e88b299a-3663-41ef-8759-7b7d7cc39323-1-1 Subject: [Bloat] FW: [Dewayne-Net] Ajit Pai caves to SpaceX but is still skeptical of Musk's latency claims X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:03:17 -0000 ------=_20200611120316000000_80440 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0ASo, what do you think the latency (including bloat in the satellites) wi= ll be? My guess is > 2000 msec, based on the experience with Apple on ATT W= ireless back when it was rolled out (at 10 am, in each of 5 cities I tested= , repeatedly with smokeping, for 24 hour periods, the ATT Wireless access n= etwork experienced ping time grew to 2000 msec., and then to 4000 by mid da= y - true lag-under-load, with absolutely zero lost packets!)=0A =0AI get th= at SpaceX is predicting low latency by estimating physical distance and per= fect routing in their LEO constellation. Possibly it is feasible to achieve= this if there is zero load over a fixed path. But networks aren't physical= , though hardware designers seem to think they are.=0A =0AAnyone know ANY r= eason to expect better from Musk's clown car parade?=0A =0A =0AOn Thursday,= June 11, 2020 6:17am, "Dewayne Hendricks" said:=0A= =0A=0A=0A> [Note: This item comes from friend Robert Berger. DLH]=0A> =0A> = Ajit Pai caves to SpaceX but is still skeptical of Musk=E2=80=99s latency c= laims=0A> SpaceX wins FCC funding battle but must prove it can deliver low = latencies.=0A> By JON BRODKIN=0A> Jun 10 2020=0A> =0A> =0A> The Federal Communications Commission has rever= sed course on whether to let SpaceX=0A> and other satellite providers apply= for rural-broadband funding as low-latency=0A> providers. But Chairman Aji= t Pai said companies like SpaceX will have to prove=0A> they can offer low = latencies, as the FCC does not plan to "fund untested=0A> technologies."=0A= > =0A> Pai's original proposal classified SpaceX and all other satellite op= erators as=0A> high-latency providers for purposes of the funding distribut= ion, saying the=0A> companies haven't proven they can deliver latencies bel= ow the FCC standard of=0A> 100ms. Pai's plan to shut satellite companies ou= t of the low-latency category=0A> would have put them at a disadvantage in = a reverse auction that will distribute=0A> $16 billion from the Rural Digit= al Opportunity Fund (RDOF).=0A> =0A> But SpaceX is launching low-Earth-orbi= t (LEO) satellites in altitudes ranging from=0A> 540km to 570km, a fraction= of the 35,000km used with geostationary satellites,=0A> providing much low= er latency than traditional satellite service. SpaceX told the=0A> FCC that= its Starlink service will easily clear the 100ms cutoff, and FCC=0A> Commi= ssioner Michael O'Rielly urged Pai to let LEO companies apply in the=0A> lo= w-latency tier.=0A> =0A> The FCC voted to approve the updated auction rules= yesterday. The final order=0A> isn't public yet, but it's clear from state= ments by Pai and other commissioners=0A> that SpaceX and other LEO companie= s will be allowed to apply in the low-latency=0A> tier. The satellite compa= nies won't gain automatic entry into the low-latency=0A> tier, but they wil= l be given a chance to prove that they can deliver latencies=0A> below 100m= s.=0A> =0A> "I am grateful to the chairman for agreeing to expand eligibili= ty for the=0A> low-latency performance tier and change language that was pr= ejudicial to certain=0A> providers," O'Rielly said at yesterday's FCC meeti= ng. "While a technology-neutral=0A> policy across the board may have been m= ore effective in promoting innovation and=0A> maximizing the value of ratep= ayer investments, I recognize that a balancing act=0A> was necessary to rea= ch the current disposition."=0A> =0A> Pai: FCC will apply =E2=80=9Cvery clo= se scrutiny=E2=80=9D=0A> =0A> Pai said that he agreed to the change "at the= request of one of my fellow=0A> commissioners." The final rules "don't ent= irely close the door on low-Earth orbit=0A> satellite providers bidding in = the low-latency tier," Pai continued. "However, it=0A> is also important to= keep in mind the following point: The purpose of the Rural=0A> Digital Opp= ortunity Fund is to ensure that Americans have access to broadband, no=0A> = matter where they live. It is not a technology incubator to fund untested= =0A> technologies. And we will not allow taxpayer funding to be wasted. A n= ew=0A> technology may sound good in theory and look great on paper. But thi= s=0A> multi-billion-dollar broadband program will require 't's to be crosse= d=E2=80=94not=0A> fingers. So any such application will be given very close= scrutiny."=0A> =0A> When contacted by Ars today, Pai's office confirmed th= at "the commission modified=0A> the draft to permit LEO service providers t= o apply to bid in the low-latency tier=0A> instead of limiting them to the = high-latency tier, and staff will be closely=0A> reviewing all applications= to ensure they can meet the FCC's performance=0A> requirements for service= providers."=0A> =0A> SpaceX is aiming to provide service later this year, = and CEO Elon Musk has saidthe=0A> company is aiming for latency below 20ms.= =0A> =0A> Commissioner Geoffrey Starks supported the low-latency change in = his statement:=0A> =0A> I appreciate Commissioner O'Rielly's work in revisi= ng this Public Notice to=0A> eliminate the categorical bar on low-Earth orb= it satellite systems bidding in the=0A> low-latency tier, especially now th= at we have evidence in the record that those=0A> systems can meet the 100-m= illisecond latency standard. At the same time, I see no=0A> need for the Pu= blic Notice's predictive judgments about the merits of short-form=0A> appli= cations from low-Earth orbit satellite operators. As I have stated=0A> prev= iously, next-generation satellite broadband holds tremendous technological= =0A> promise for addressing the digital divide and is led by strong America= n companies=0A> with a lengthy record of success. Commission staff should e= valuate those=0A> applications on their own merits.=0A> =0A> Pai and O'Riel= ly are Republicans, while Starks is part of the FCC's Democratic=0A> minori= ty.=0A> =0A> SpaceX excluded from gigabit tier=0A> =0A> The $16 billion in = phone and broadband subsidies will be distributed in a reverse=0A> auction = scheduled to begin on October 29. ISPs can seek funding in census blocks=0A= > where no provider offers home-Internet speeds of at least 25Mbps downstre= am and=0A> 3Mbps upstream. The $16 billion will be distributed over 10 year= s, so ISPs that=0A> get funded will collect a total of about $1.6 billion a= year and face requirements=0A> to deploy broadband service to a certain nu= mber of homes and businesses.=0A> =0A> Pai's auction rules also shut SpaceX= and other satellite operators out of applying=0A> for funding in the gigab= it tier. SpaceX could still apply for funding in the=0A> 100Mbps-and-below = categories, but the auction will prioritize applications in the=0A> gigabit= category. SpaceX has said in the past that it would offer gigabit speeds,= =0A> but the company seems to have only objected to the latency restriction= .=0A> =0A> The commissioners' statements did not mention any change to the = policy excluding=0A> all satellite providers from the gigabit tier. The gig= abit tier requires 1Gbps=0A> download speeds and 500Mbps upload speeds, whi= ch in practice may restrict the=0A> category primarily to fiber-to-the-home= providers or cable companies that adopt=0A> full-duplex DOCSIS technology.= =0A> =0A> Pai said the FCC is allowing fixed-wireless and DSL providers to = apply in the=0A> gigabit tier but said that "commission staff will conduct = a careful, case-by-case=0A> review of applications to ensure that bidders w= ill be able to meet required=0A> performance obligations." There's apparent= ly still no allowance for LEO-satellite=0A> providers to bid in the gigabit= tier.=0A> =0A> [snip]=0A> =0A> Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: http://dewaynenet.wor= dpress.com/feed/=0A> Twitter: https://twitter.com/wa8dzp=0A> =0A> =0A> ------=_20200611120316000000_80440 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

So, what do you think = the latency (including bloat in the satellites) will be? My guess is > 2= 000 msec, based on the experience with Apple on ATT Wireless back when it w= as rolled out (at 10 am, in each of 5 cities I tested, repeatedly with smok= eping, for 24 hour periods, the ATT Wireless access network experienced pin= g time grew to 2000 msec., and then to 4000 by mid day - true lag-under-loa= d, with absolutely zero lost packets!)

=0A

 =0A

I get that SpaceX is predicting low latency by est= imating physical distance and perfect routing in their LEO constellation. P= ossibly it is feasible to achieve this if there is zero load over a fixed p= ath. But networks aren't physical, though hardware designers seem to think = they are.

=0A

 

=0A

Anyo= ne know ANY reason to expect better from Musk's clown car parade?

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

On Thursday, June 11, 2020 6:17am, "Dewayne Hendricks" <dew= ayne@warpspeed.com> said:

=0A
=0A

> [Note: This item comes from friend Robert= Berger. DLH]
>
> Ajit Pai caves to SpaceX but is still sk= eptical of Musk=E2=80=99s latency claims
> SpaceX wins FCC funding = battle but must prove it can deliver low latencies.
> By JON BRODKI= N
> Jun 10 2020
> <https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2= 020/06/ajit-pai-caves-to-spacex-but-is-still-skeptical-of-musks-latency-cla= ims/>
>
> The Federal Communications Commission has rev= ersed course on whether to let SpaceX
> and other satellite provide= rs apply for rural-broadband funding as low-latency
> providers. Bu= t Chairman Ajit Pai said companies like SpaceX will have to prove
>= they can offer low latencies, as the FCC does not plan to "fund untested> technologies."
>
> Pai's original proposal classi= fied SpaceX and all other satellite operators as
> high-latency pro= viders for purposes of the funding distribution, saying the
> compa= nies haven't proven they can deliver latencies below the FCC standard of> 100ms. Pai's plan to shut satellite companies out of the low-latenc= y category
> would have put them at a disadvantage in a reverse auc= tion that will distribute
> $16 billion from the Rural Digital Oppo= rtunity Fund (RDOF).
>
> But SpaceX is launching low-Earth= -orbit (LEO) satellites in altitudes ranging from
> 540km to 570km,= a fraction of the 35,000km used with geostationary satellites,
> p= roviding much lower latency than traditional satellite service. SpaceX told= the
> FCC that its Starlink service will easily clear the 100ms cu= toff, and FCC
> Commissioner Michael O'Rielly urged Pai to let LEO = companies apply in the
> low-latency tier.
>
> The= FCC voted to approve the updated auction rules yesterday. The final order<= br />> isn't public yet, but it's clear from statements by Pai and other= commissioners
> that SpaceX and other LEO companies will be allowe= d to apply in the low-latency
> tier. The satellite companies won't= gain automatic entry into the low-latency
> tier, but they will be= given a chance to prove that they can deliver latencies
> below 10= 0ms.
>
> "I am grateful to the chairman for agreeing to ex= pand eligibility for the
> low-latency performance tier and change = language that was prejudicial to certain
> providers," O'Rielly sai= d at yesterday's FCC meeting. "While a technology-neutral
> policy = across the board may have been more effective in promoting innovation and> maximizing the value of ratepayer investments, I recognize that a = balancing act
> was necessary to reach the current disposition.">
> Pai: FCC will apply =E2=80=9Cvery close scrutiny=E2=80= =9D
>
> Pai said that he agreed to the change "at the requ= est of one of my fellow
> commissioners." The final rules "don't en= tirely close the door on low-Earth orbit
> satellite providers bidd= ing in the low-latency tier," Pai continued. "However, it
> is also= important to keep in mind the following point: The purpose of the Rural> Digital Opportunity Fund is to ensure that Americans have access to= broadband, no
> matter where they live. It is not a technology inc= ubator to fund untested
> technologies. And we will not allow taxpa= yer funding to be wasted. A new
> technology may sound good in theo= ry and look great on paper. But this
> multi-billion-dollar broadba= nd program will require 't's to be crossed=E2=80=94not
> fingers. S= o any such application will be given very close scrutiny."
>
= > When contacted by Ars today, Pai's office confirmed that "the commissi= on modified
> the draft to permit LEO service providers to apply to= bid in the low-latency tier
> instead of limiting them to the high= -latency tier, and staff will be closely
> reviewing all applicatio= ns to ensure they can meet the FCC's performance
> requirements for= service providers."
>
> SpaceX is aiming to provide servi= ce later this year, and CEO Elon Musk has saidthe
> company is aimi= ng for latency below 20ms.
>
> Commissioner Geoffrey Stark= s supported the low-latency change in his statement:
>
> I= appreciate Commissioner O'Rielly's work in revising this Public Notice to<= br />> eliminate the categorical bar on low-Earth orbit satellite system= s bidding in the
> low-latency tier, especially now that we have ev= idence in the record that those
> systems can meet the 100-millisec= ond latency standard. At the same time, I see no
> need for the Pub= lic Notice's predictive judgments about the merits of short-form
> = applications from low-Earth orbit satellite operators. As I have stated
> previously, next-generation satellite broadband holds tremendous tec= hnological
> promise for addressing the digital divide and is led b= y strong American companies
> with a lengthy record of success. Com= mission staff should evaluate those
> applications on their own mer= its.
>
> Pai and O'Rielly are Republicans, while Starks is= part of the FCC's Democratic
> minority.
>
> Spac= eX excluded from gigabit tier
>
> The $16 billion in phone= and broadband subsidies will be distributed in a reverse
> auction= scheduled to begin on October 29. ISPs can seek funding in census blocks> where no provider offers home-Internet speeds of at least 25Mbps d= ownstream and
> 3Mbps upstream. The $16 billion will be distributed= over 10 years, so ISPs that
> get funded will collect a total of a= bout $1.6 billion a year and face requirements
> to deploy broadban= d service to a certain number of homes and businesses.
>
>= Pai's auction rules also shut SpaceX and other satellite operators out of = applying
> for funding in the gigabit tier. SpaceX could still appl= y for funding in the
> 100Mbps-and-below categories, but the auctio= n will prioritize applications in the
> gigabit category. SpaceX ha= s said in the past that it would offer gigabit speeds,
> but the co= mpany seems to have only objected to the latency restriction.
> > The commissioners' statements did not mention any change to the pol= icy excluding
> all satellite providers from the gigabit tier. The = gigabit tier requires 1Gbps
> download speeds and 500Mbps upload sp= eeds, which in practice may restrict the
> category primarily to fi= ber-to-the-home providers or cable companies that adopt
> full-dupl= ex DOCSIS technology.
>
> Pai said the FCC is allowing fix= ed-wireless and DSL providers to apply in the
> gigabit tier but sa= id that "commission staff will conduct a careful, case-by-case
> re= view of applications to ensure that bidders will be able to meet required> performance obligations." There's apparently still no allowance fo= r LEO-satellite
> providers to bid in the gigabit tier.
> <= br />> [snip]
>
> Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: http://dewaynen= et.wordpress.com/feed/
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/wa8dzp
&= gt;
>
>

=0A
 ------=_20200611120316000000_80440--