[NNagain] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[NNagain] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[Dave Taht]

About the internet this year?

In looking over again, this magnificent document from last year...

https://docs.google.com/document/d/19ADByjakzQXCj9Re_pUvrb5Qe5OK-QmhlYRLMBY4vH4/edit?tab=t.0

I don't know what I would change. Although cited 16 times in the
resulting fcc overview, it didn't change the overarching conclusions
any. resubmit with a brief cover letter? get more sigs?

I would point at the metrics starlink adopted as a model, perhaps:
https://api.starlink.com/public-files/StarlinkLatency.pdf and the L4S
trial at comcast...

It's really bothersome that users still have to go through the
contortions this spectrum cable user had to go through last week, and
the rest, helpless.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HomeNetworking/comments/1h0reph/comment/lzgdo0j/

-- 
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[Michael Richardson]

I hadn't seen https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat before.
Very pretty.  I tried it just now, at the diner, tethered to my phone, hardly
surprised to get an F.  I wish the mobile carriers cared.
Alas, the suggestions at the bottom include IQrouter, which is no longer in
production.  Probably should include OpenWRT One. 

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[Tanya Weiman]

This is cool, thanks!!

> On 12/01/2024 12:43 PM EST Michael Richardson via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
>
> I hadn't seen https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat before.
> Very pretty.  I tried it just now, at the diner, tethered to my phone, hardly
> surprised to get an F.  I wish the mobile carriers cared.
> Alas, the suggestions at the bottom include IQrouter, which is no longer in
> production.  Probably should include OpenWRT One.
>
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain

Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[Frantisek Borsik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1181 bytes --]

Good catch, Michael. Forwarded it to Sina, CEO Waveform.

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, Dec 1, 2024 at 6:43 PM Michael Richardson via Nnagain <
nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> I hadn't seen https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat before.
> Very pretty.  I tried it just now, at the diner, tethered to my phone,
> hardly
> surprised to get an F.  I wish the mobile carriers cared.
> Alas, the suggestions at the bottom include IQrouter, which is no longer in
> production.  Probably should include OpenWRT One.
>
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
> networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT
> architect   [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on
> rails    [
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3067 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[Robert McMahon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6662 bytes --]

I'm seeing something interesting using fq_codel, protectcli vault and
opnsense. The background load going active cause the responses per second
to increase and the bb times to go from 15 ms to 10 ms. I added four
upstream TCP streams (not shown) during the yellow time slots and the
bounceback delay became lesser!

rjmcmahon@fedora:~/Code/bloat/iperf2-code$ iperf -c <my-cloud-server> -i 1
-e --bounceback  -t 60 --hide-ips
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to (**hidden**), TCP port 5001 with pid 87070 (1/0
flows/load)
Bounceback test (req/reply size = 100 Byte/ 100 Byte) (server hold req=0
usecs & tcp_quickack)
Bursting request 10 times every 1.00 second(s)
TCP congestion control using cubic
TOS defaults to 0x0 (dscp=0,ecn=0) and nodelay (Nagle off)
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  1] local *.*.*.59%enp4s0 port 56380 connected with *.*.*.123 port 5001
(bb w/quickack req/reply/hold=100/100/0) (icwnd/mss/irtt=14/1448/10624)
(ct=10.71 ms) on 2024-12-01 13:49:05.856 (PST)
[ ID] Interval        Transfer    Bandwidth         BB
cnt=avg/min/max/stdev         Rtry  Cwnd(pkts)/RTT(var)   Tx/Rx bytes
 RPS(avg)
[  1] 0.00-1.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=15.609/11.041/19.933/2.256 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=64
[  1] 1.00-2.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.806/11.047/16.801/1.918 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=68
[  1] 2.00-3.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=13.946/10.260/16.458/2.416 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=72
[  1] 3.00-4.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.997/10.714/16.314/1.579 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=67
[  1] 4.00-5.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.612/11.687/15.938/1.504 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=68
[  1] 5.00-6.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.919/11.177/15.786/1.339 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=67
[  1] 6.00-7.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.381/10.485/16.311/2.250 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=70
[  1] 7.00-8.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.221/10.669/17.170/2.404 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=70
[  1] 8.00-9.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.417/11.493/16.045/1.400 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=69
[  1] 9.00-10.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=12.815/11.467/13.680/0.694 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=78








*[  1] 10.00-11.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=10.200/9.071/11.488/0.903 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=98[  1] 11.00-12.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=10.236/8.838/11.345/0.807 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=98[  1] 12.00-13.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=9.560/8.512/11.301/0.782 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte Rx=1000
Byte  RPS=105[  1] 13.00-14.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=9.939/9.245/10.944/0.552 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte Rx=1000
Byte  RPS=101[  1] 14.00-15.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=13.722/12.576/15.569/0.855 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=73[  1] 15.00-16.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=11.856/10.674/12.693/0.624 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=84[  1] 16.00-17.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=10.260/8.872/11.085/0.652 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=97[  1] 17.00-18.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=10.044/9.152/11.054/0.755 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=100[  1] 18.00-19.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=10.199/8.724/11.377/0.928 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=98*
[  1] 19.00-20.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.831/11.103/18.682/1.886 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=67
[  1] 20.00-21.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.657/11.171/15.684/1.574 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=68
[  1] 21.00-22.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=15.283/10.757/18.079/2.311 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=65
[  1] 22.00-23.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.960/10.551/16.555/1.991 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=67
[  1] 23.00-24.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.699/10.847/16.979/1.815 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=68
[  1] 24.00-25.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.240/10.476/15.544/1.733 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=70
[  1] 25.00-26.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=14.230/10.513/15.785/1.972 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=70
[  1] 26.00-27.00 sec  1.95 KBytes  16.0 Kbits/sec
 10=13.530/10.297/15.595/2.433 ms    0   0K/(0)/0(0) us  Tx=1000 Byte
Rx=1000 Byte  RPS=74

Bob

On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 2:32 PM Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain <
nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> Good catch, Michael. Forwarded it to Sina, CEO Waveform.
>
> 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, Dec 1, 2024 at 6:43 PM Michael Richardson via Nnagain <
> nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
>> I hadn't seen https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat before.
>> Very pretty.  I tried it just now, at the diner, tethered to my phone,
>> hardly
>> surprised to get an F.  I wish the mobile carriers cared.
>> Alas, the suggestions at the bottom include IQrouter, which is no longer
>> in
>> production.  Probably should include OpenWRT One.
>>
>> --
>> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
>> networks [
>> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT
>> architect   [
>> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on
>> rails    [
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nnagain mailing list
>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 9302 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[Livingood, Jason]

> About the internet this year?

There is nothing happening until the new FCC chair takes over, under the new administration. 

Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] I don't know if there is a new FCC NOI...

[Robert McMahon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1249 bytes --]

The FCC won't block people or companies from building products & services
around Fi-Wi in premise networks. So don't hold back on that. The sooner we
fix in premise the better.

We also need to fix journalism. Social networks aren't cutting it.

Also, the mobile phone needs to be deprecated. Maybe some innovation on the
device side of things?

Generally speaking, we seem to have abandoned the idea of using markets to
pay people rather instead have distorted things, e.g. abuse peoples'
privacy rights in the name of selling our information to unscrupulous
advertisers. Part of that fix is a digital payment system where it's funded
by users and not by advertisers.

Our communications systems need a lot of work at all levels. The industry
seems distracted by AI or LEO. Fix the foundations first.

My $0.02,
Bob

On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 5:30 AM Livingood, Jason via Nnagain <
nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> > About the internet this year?
>
> There is nothing happening until the new FCC chair takes over, under the
> new administration.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1804 bytes --]