From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua1-x92d.google.com (mail-ua1-x92d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F5673B29E for ; Mon, 17 May 2021 11:08:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ua1-x92d.google.com with SMTP id 105so2194399uak.8 for ; Mon, 17 May 2021 08:08:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cOPa6hnnH5uyTAO+GkrRxxBhgXF2ks8JL4dz3zSIpqE=; b=tuJvLomN+mX22gprzz4BEd+/p+KYskTuVsLDhtjGMz6FDSwze86sWQNd55XjAY+44C DkDeKXidyBv2LJXeJGLoi+L6LOFmCJAZoBv+B9tTEvYsZiNnfEsg78Ewf03RatWHG3vx dypdHZVENSzLCj6H04xYc2HKR5WrK5RfwS8fsm0PZ7G+ga5etVvklvOQU7kEEWzwAuCA vvtDPmI9T4yR22WGF78PoMiiK6D/7OsMnqBlJehMjI9wJtGJzO+cgyD16sTXbMP6acXj pF3nGuK6cRMb1XU2eJG4dg2pHF9Tfc/TD2z2TUK0fhkYl2oabd4kRXIld2DIJ63TLrR3 iwdQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cOPa6hnnH5uyTAO+GkrRxxBhgXF2ks8JL4dz3zSIpqE=; b=EU9pPJKWfEC1hdJGqHtAVw/JhLzkNXPfhBM+HsX/LXT1s/YWv4osxhVSyrB7y5h1Lu OD8QAqe6MmkDWXhf05mJLgwl6HQ9MopfDbetp0ByczP5I54SrGPgbJvrYuiv6BsAl4Dl AcCkTH69oFJU6S47r8qj0AO//AxEiGoHYGXQ1fJZtg9WXn+l+bPrwA7nuap4H6tFkJmb vyZYkr7M6bIThTDHOKmqKuqdXq5u1YlKgJoz48sDeI78ms2ormsJw+8AWpjOoLkfYrr0 lvUtmDsmgezWa6qZgHeEkN3plHEA7OwfH4hGbVc9P73qE2YhCmUV8ow8j+fnq12hayNF 4IAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530T3li+c63vTlPFwc56haaYtopv9KhWNrDKb1mcnmKYxyrTb0xF Nn8sv8uRX8sqlcpqghcFNI/8hEKd4oN5OhGhz+7sWw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTJbKEVH9IGII8y5SVTBddMYnAuW27Tim5BATgPf1bbNw7UUudT1ZeSF5fQ2tCSjhRzOR5V+GbeJsbR1scSmE= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:2945:: with SMTP id t63mr68675uat.63.1621264121788; Mon, 17 May 2021 08:08:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Neal Cardwell Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 11:08:25 -0400 Message-ID: To: Matt Mathis Cc: Dave Taht , starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net, bloat Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [Bloat] starlink bloat in review 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: Mon, 17 May 2021 15:08:42 -0000 On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:00 PM Matt Mathis via Bloat wrote: > > I don't understand: starlink doesn't terminate the TCP connection, > does it? Or are you referring to YT's BBR adequately addressing > Starlinks variable RTT? "Adequately" is probably the operative word. > It is not too hard to imagine what goes wrong with BBR if the actual > path length varies, and on an underloaded network, you may not be able > to even detect the symptoms. On that note, the article mentions: "Starlink itself measures ping times for Counter-Strike: Go and Fortnite in its app, and I rarely saw those numbers dip below 50ms, mostly hovering around 85-115ms." If the range 50ms to 115ms is representative of two-way propagation delays on their network, then it sounds like BBR can probably perform reasonably well in that environment. The algorithm is designed to tolerate factor-of-two variations in RTT and still maintain full utilization, if there is reasonable buffering. neal