From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io1-xd2b.google.com (mail-io1-xd2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) (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 2B6493CB35; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 19:30:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd2b.google.com with SMTP id q22so28402255iog.4; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 16:30:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wHlFrD/JelJl5Jf+yDQVOrBtTKYECjnz8QcnDWkDW/c=; b=Th9zO2lWVRvGhd/nb74gb2X7Byf8fk1vr6YJUTWhIiaglgB1q9xl6H8GciEnhqBPnG 0UlOmodgaPdms+shlze4jN0Pb93Zv/AT8Ciet7x1hjWQGjOKWQL8sf7m2kEaeN8SENFx VdqMwBw4/7XmQp2BEO8mCcB9aj0Hu531PH35LPU6CT9QU5RgfnV6llVke3SbQW3At9ib +ADvHGmKLXO17lJjp/IfjrVdufuG3OEmdZdoG4tgm8ifqTBv7ML8Cozutt6g8XTcmTH1 VzBoSHdnCeC8HaCW/Zkoc0GyIoXdRUPwT/aQqKh/BYUhYUpxAqaH1S9SQLOdOPHIqWRB GtNg== 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wHlFrD/JelJl5Jf+yDQVOrBtTKYECjnz8QcnDWkDW/c=; b=NVNZ9D49q6vHlgSJ5BtI3WZRPQxndsj4Ow4Ba/qNkYJyB/YNKll7TI6jrI5fY4oewD 40eGVKGMbj4ICKRwdolphTkpAE6xLCIvUuNdX+r6xaa93988xOGBdAsO/zZ/OgPIcJk5 7L6W+SvfWZIHvMYeHRloT83EloEb44UBQCrWkCYpO4PycZ1VRNBAcfMkNc6HOYn8Irxs /F9dYY2J0W49HXfZ8sPpN4PVxWik7hKGi6mE2Ccnjmr1w9XPkjmOg9wEwLjIrKAd0jLi o+8alMDbqXNRv4GKTNaSFaGGf5er1tQZvSSICsM+o2gdYDeLYwjxLb1C1sth1HVlHQy8 e0RA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVQcfsimG4XJ0b95DkahzmBhs9XN75wd8U0fUoQdfN15Aa8Akef UPy9ra0hmzsy9K1sAGW2m8WLAky8prdaHpeOcfQm4w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxKYbte/jBXjQYB15TDtL6PB8Sf+DULAnuoi6PJ4IEhKlDtHNTCwLRkDjMNW5aW0GUJC9ZldC45SDD2nHcAzmU= X-Received: by 2002:a02:9f07:: with SMTP id z7mr15644901jal.29.1564702257428; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 16:30:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5DE9419080ADFF1F0C79D8BA@192.168.1.16> In-Reply-To: <5DE9419080ADFF1F0C79D8BA@192.168.1.16> From: Dave Taht Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 16:30:45 -0700 Message-ID: To: Kenneth Porter , Make-Wifi-fast Cc: bloat Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Bloat] Does 5g have the bloat problems of WiFi? X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 23:30:58 -0000 This is one of those philosophical questions that covers a lot of ground under the 5g moniker. 0) This looks like a paid placement structured like an infomercial. AT&T would dearly like X$/month from every device connected to the network, selling microcells and carrying all your traffic back to the cloud. The robot company is cute. The story claiming this offloads the instore wifi - not so hot. Usually the opposite claim is made. 1) For starters, it IS looking like AT&T etc, completely missed the bufferbloat problem: https://www.reddit.com/r/verizon/comments/9lqp6n/i_got_5g_home_internet_ins= talled_this_week_and_it/ (I've got more links than this and have had a rather discouraging talk with one of AT&T's managers ) Ericcson and a few other LTE related folk haven't, but they don't seem to have products yet. Perhaps they'll learn. 1a) For handsets there are decent cross layer techniques also. 2) But I think the thrust of the article re bandwidth and conflating bufferbloat into it are *both* wrong. It's more a matter of how many devices you can pack onto a given AP/microcell in a given area, which is both a function of how good your (MU)-mimo is... and how fast the mac can switch between them. Inter-device latency, not blo= at. And that's kind of anybody's guess at the moment. Including what 5g is - 802.11d? y? a zillion other standards come under this umbrella. what frequencies are you going to use? etc. ("bufferbloat" isn't a problem unless these robots are using huge amounts of bandwidth, and I'd hope the were mostly just uploading positional and other sensor data, rather than, say, a 360 degree camera feed. However using the spectrum effeciently as the fq_codel for wifi work did, certainly helps that) (And were it me, I'd WIRE up the cash terminals, and sure as heck not share the corp wifi with customers) This being one of my bad days, I think the 5g/4g takeover is inevitable given the billions being poured into it relatve to the paltry investment into wifi. Outsourcing all the details as to how your robot runs around, verses actually running a wire to your shop and getting multiple APs right, few dead spots, is too hard to maintain, handoffs too painful. On my good days I point to intel doing a great job on their wifi chips and closing down their LTE division, as an example that LTE is actually far more difficult to make and make work than wifi is. As well as nobody wants to have a sim card for ecery device they own or outsource all their traffic to the cloud. WifI is still loved. It is still a lot better than LTE in most coffee shops. PS But vs the cost of the robot vs the cost of the wireless chipset, I'd see 'em all equipped both ways and be letting the customer decide. On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 3:38 PM Kenneth Porter wrote= : > > I just saw this article claiming that 5g is allowing brick-and-mortar > automation providers to overcome limitations in WiFi, and I'm wondering i= f > the technology is going to suffer from all the same problems previously > seen in WiFi. > > > > (The "googly-eyed robots" in the title are man-sized robots that wander > grocery stores to visually track inventory. Someone put googly eyes on th= em > to keep them from scaring customers.) > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat -- Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740