Re: [LibreQoS] [Rpm] [Starlink] On FiWi

[Frantisek Borsik <frantisek.borsik@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6596 bytes --]

Thanks, Dan. So we got here, but how to get out of this craziness.
The question is what (if anything)  we can actually learn from the very
beginning of the Internet. If I remember correctly, there was as part of
this discussion here (or in the other thread) on IP vs LoRaWAN.
Can we use something from the good ole IP frame work that would help us to
do this?
Also, is it even possible at all?

Btw, here is a good example of explaining, learning of the performance
(latency, jitter, bufferbloat) side of the Internet, shared with the
customers by Robert, the guy behind the beginning of LibreQoS:
https://jackrabbitwireless.com/performance/
Great inspiration.

All the best,

Frank

Frantisek (Frank) Borsik



https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik

Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714

iMessage, mobile: +420775230885

Skype: casioa5302ca

frantisek.borsik@gmail.com


On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:28 PM dan <dandenson@gmail.com> wrote:

> I more or less agree with you Frantisek.   There are throughput numbers
> that are need for current gen and next gen services, but those are often
> met with 50-100Mbps plans today that are enough to handle multiple 4K
> streams plus browsing and so forth, yet no one talks about latency and
> packet loss and other useful metrics at all and consumers are not able to
> and never will be able to understand more that a couple of numbers.  This
> is an industry problem and unless we have some sort of working group that
> is pushing this like the 'got milk?' advertisements I'm not sure how we
> will ever get there.  The big vendors that have pushed docsis to extremes
> have no interest in these other details, they win on the big 'speed' number
> and will advertising all sorts of performance around that number.
>
> We need a marketing/lobby group.  Not wispa or other individual industry
> groups, but one specifically for *ISPs that will contribute as well as
> implement policies and put that out on social media etc etc.  i don't know
> how we get there without a big player (ie Netflix, hulu..) contributing.
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 2:46 PM Frantisek Borsik <
> frantisek.borsik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Late to the party, also not an engineer...but if there's something I have
>> learned during my time with RF elements:
>>
>> --- 99% of the vendors out there (and most of the ISPs, I dare to say, as
>> well) don't know/care/respect thing as "simple", as physics.
>>
>> --- 2.4GHz was lost because of this, and 5GHz was saved like "5 minutes
>> to midnight" for ISPs, by RF elements Horns (and UltraHorns, UltraDish,
>> Asymmetrical Horns later on), basically, that have inspired ("Imitation is
>> the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness." Oscar
>> Wilde) some other vendors of the antennas to bring their own version of
>> Horns etc.
>>
>> --- sure, lot of improvements in order to fight noise, modulate,
>> virtualise (like Tarana Wireless) were done on the AP (radio) side, but
>> still - physics is physics and it was overlooked and neglected for such a
>> LONG time.
>>
>> --- ISPs were told by the vendors to basically BLAST through the noise
>> and many more BS like this. So they did as they were told, they were
>> blasting and blasting. Those that were getting smarter, switched to RF
>> elements Horns, stopped blasting, started to being reasonable with topology
>> ("if Your customers are 5 miles away from the AP, You will not blast like
>> crazy for 10 miles, because You will pick up all the noise") and they even
>> started to cooperate - frequency coordination, colocation - with other ISPs
>> on the same towers etc (the same co-ordination needs to be done between the
>> ISP behind the CPEs now - on the Wi-Fi routers of their customers.)
>>
>> The similar development I was able to see when I got into Wi-Fi (while at
>> TurrisTech <https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/tango_on_turris/> - secure,
>> powerful open source Wi-Fi routers). The same story, basically, for vendors
>> as well as ISPs. No actual respect for the underlying physics, attempts to
>> blast-over the noise, chasing clouds ("muah WiFi 6, 6E....oh no, here comes
>> Wi-Fi 7 and this will change EVERYTHING ---> see, it was a lot of "fun" to
>> see this happening with 5G, and the amount of over-promise and
>> under-delivery BS was and even still is, staggering.)
>> The whole Wi-Fi industry is chasing (almost) empty numbers (bandwidth)
>> instead of focusing on bufferbloat (latency, jitter...).
>> Thanks to Domos for putting together the Understanding Latency webinar
>> series. I know that most of You are aware of latency as the most important
>> metric we should focus on nowadays in order to improve the overall Internet
>> experience, but still...
>> About 6 hours watch of watching. And rewatching:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdTPz5srJ8M
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAVwmUG21OY
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRmcWyIVXvg
>>
>> Also, there is one more thing to add re Wi-Fi. If You can cable, You
>> should always cable. Mesh as we know it, would be a way better Wi-Fi
>> enhancement, if the mesh units would be wired as much as possible. We will
>> reduce the noice, grow smart and save spectrum.
>>
>> Thanks for the great discussion.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> Frantisek (Frank) Borsik
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
>>
>> Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714
>>
>> iMessage, mobile: +420775230885
>>
>> Skype: casioa5302ca
>>
>> frantisek.borsik@gmail.com
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 11:27 AM Michael Richardson via Rpm <
>> rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> {lots of lists on the CC}
>>>
>>> The problem I have with lorawan is that it's too small for anything but
>>> the
>>> smallest sensors.  When it breaks (due to infant death or just
>>> vanadalism)
>>> who is going to notice enough to fix it?  My belief is that people won't
>>> break things that they like/depend upon.  Or at least, that there will be
>>> social pressure not to.
>>>
>>> Better to have a protected 1Mb/s sensor lan within a 144Mb/s wifi than a
>>> adjacent lorawan.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>>>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-                      *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rpm mailing list
>>> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm
>>>
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 10348 bytes --]