[Starlink] insanely great waveform result for starlink

Fri Jan 13 17:09:32 EST 2023

The irtt run finished a few seconds before the flent run, but here are the
results:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FKve13ssUMW1LLWOXLM2931Yx6uMHw8K/view?usp=share_link
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZXd64A0pfUedLr3FyhDNTHA7vxv8S2Gk/view?usp=share_link
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rx64UPQHHz3IMNiJtb1oFqtqw2DvhvEE/view?usp=share_link

[image: image.png]
[image: image.png]

Jonathan Bennett
Hackaday.com

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 3:30 PM Nathan Owens via Starlink <
starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> Here's Luis's run -- the top line below the edge of the graph is 200ms
> [image: Screenshot 2023-01-13 at 1.30.03 PM.png]
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 1:25 PM Luis A. Cornejo <luis.a.cornejo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dave,
>>
>> Here is a run the way I think you wanted it.
>>
>> irtt running for 5 min to your dallas server, followed by a waveform
>> test, then a few seconds of inactivity, cloudflare test, a few more secs of
>> nothing, flent test to dallas. Packet capture is currently uploading (will
>> be done in 20 min or so), irtt JSON also in there (.zip file):
>>
>>
>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1FLWqrzNcM8aK-ZXQywNkZGFR81Fnzn-F?usp=share_link
>>
>> -Luis
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 2:50 PM Dave Taht via Starlink <
>> starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 12:30 PM Nathan Owens <nathan at nathan.io> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here's the data visualization for Johnathan's Data
>>>>
>>>> [image: Screenshot 2023-01-13 at 12.29.15 PM.png]
>>>>
>>>> You can see the path change at :12, :27, :42, :57 after the minute.
>>>> Some paths are clearly busier than others with increased loss, latency, and
>>>> jitter.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am so glad to see loss and bounded delay here. Also a bit of rigor
>>> regarding what traffic was active locally vs on the path would be nice,
>>> although it seems to line up with the known 15s starlink switchover thing
>>> (need a name for this), in this case, doing a few speedtests
>>> while that irtt is running would show the impact(s) of whatever else
>>> they are up to.
>>>
>>> It would also be my hope that the loss distribution in the middle
>>> portion of this data is good, not bursty, but we don't have a tool to take
>>> apart that. (I am so hopeless at json)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 10:09 AM Nathan Owens <nathan at nathan.io> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I’ll run my visualization code on this result this afternoon and
>>>>> report back!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 9:41 AM Jonathan Bennett via Starlink <
>>>>> starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The irtt command, run with normal, light usage:
>>>>>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SiVCiUYnx7nDTxIVOY5w-z20S2O059rA/view?usp=share_link
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jonathan Bennett
>>>>>> Hackaday.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 11:26 AM Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> packet caps would be nice... all this is very exciting news.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd so love for one or more of y'all reporting such great uplink
>>>>>>> results nowadays to duplicate and re-plot the original irtt tests we
>>>>>>> did:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> irtt client -i3ms -d300s myclosestservertoyou.starlink.taht.net -o
>>>>>>> whatever.json
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They MUST have changed their scheduling to get such amazing uplink
>>>>>>> results, in addition to better queue management.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (for the record, my servers are de, london, fremont, sydney, dallas,
>>>>>>> newark, atlanta, singapore, mumbai)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's an R and gnuplot script for plotting that output around here
>>>>>>> somewhere (I have largely personally put down the starlink project,
>>>>>>> loaning out mine) - that went by on this list... I should have
>>>>>>> written
>>>>>>> a blog entry so I can find that stuff again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 9:02 AM Jonathan Bennett via Starlink
>>>>>>> <starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 6:28 AM Ulrich Speidel via Starlink <
>>>>>>> starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On 13/01/2023 6:13 pm, Ulrich Speidel wrote:
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > From Auckland, New Zealand, using a roaming subscription, it
>>>>>>> puts me
>>>>>>> >> > in touch with a server 2000 km away. OK then:
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > IP address: nix six.
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > My thoughts shall follow later.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> OK, so here we go.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I'm always a bit skeptical when it comes to speed tests - they're
>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>> >> laden with so many caveats that it's not funny. I took our new
>>>>>>> work
>>>>>>> >> Starlink kit home in December to give it a try and the other day
>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>> >> got around to set it up. It's on a roaming subscription because
>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>> >> badly built-up campus really isn't ideal in terms of a clear view
>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>> >> sky. Oh - and did I mention that I used the Starlink Ethernet
>>>>>>> adapter,
>>>>>>> >> not the WiFi?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Caveat 1: Location, location. I live in a place where the best
>>>>>>> Starlink
>>>>>>> >> promises is about 1/3 in terms of data rate you can actually get
>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>> >> fibre to the home at under half of Starlink's price. Read: There
>>>>>>> are few
>>>>>>> >> Starlink users around. I might be the only one in my suburb.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Caveat 2: Auckland has three Starlink gateways close by: Clevedon
>>>>>>> (which
>>>>>>> >> is at a stretch daytrip cycling distance from here), Te Hana and
>>>>>>> Puwera,
>>>>>>> >> the most distant of the three and about 130 km away from me as
>>>>>>> the crow
>>>>>>> >> flies. Read: My dishy can use any satellite that any of these
>>>>>>> three can
>>>>>>> >> see, and then depending on where I put it and how much of the
>>>>>>> southern
>>>>>>> >> sky it can see, maybe also the one in Hinds, 840 km away,
>>>>>>> although that
>>>>>>> >> is obviously stretching it a bit. Either way, that's plenty of
>>>>>>> options
>>>>>>> >> for my bits to travel without needing a lot of handovers. Why?
>>>>>>> Easy: If
>>>>>>> >> your nearest teleport is close by, then the set of satellites
>>>>>>> that the
>>>>>>> >> teleport can see and the set that you can see is almost the same,
>>>>>>> so you
>>>>>>> >> can essentially stick with the same satellite while it's in view
>>>>>>> for you
>>>>>>> >> because it'll also be in view for the teleport. Pretty much any
>>>>>>> bird
>>>>>>> >> above you will do.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> And because I don't get a lot of competition from other users in
>>>>>>> my area
>>>>>>> >> vying for one of the few available satellites that can see both
>>>>>>> us and
>>>>>>> >> the teleport, this is about as good as it gets at 37S latitude.
>>>>>>> If I'd
>>>>>>> >> want it any better, I'd have to move a lot further south.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> It'd be interesting to hear from Jonathan what the availability
>>>>>>> of home
>>>>>>> >> broadband is like in the Dallas area. I note that it's at a lower
>>>>>>> >> latitude (33N) than Auckland, but the difference isn't huge. I
>>>>>>> notice
>>>>>>> >> two teleports each about 160 km away, which is also not too bad.
>>>>>>> I also
>>>>>>> >> note Starlink availability in the area is restricted at the
>>>>>>> moment -
>>>>>>> >> oversubscribed? But if Jonathan gets good data rates, then that
>>>>>>> means
>>>>>>> >> that competition for bird capacity can't be too bad - for
>>>>>>> whatever reason.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I'm in Southwest Oklahoma, but Dallas is the nearby Starlink
>>>>>>> gateway. In cities, like Dallas, and Lawton where I live, there are good
>>>>>>> broadband options. But there are also many people that live outside cities,
>>>>>>> and the options are much worse. The low density userbase in rural Oklahoma
>>>>>>> and Texas is probably ideal conditions for Starlink.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Caveat 3: Backhaul. There isn't just one queue between me and
>>>>>>> whatever I
>>>>>>> >> talk to in terms of my communications. Traceroute shows about 10
>>>>>>> hops
>>>>>>> >> between me and the University of Auckland via Starlink. That's 10
>>>>>>> >> queues, not one. Many of them will have cross traffic. So it's a
>>>>>>> bit
>>>>>>> >> hard to tell where our packets really get to wait or where they
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>> >> dropped. The insidious bit here is that a lot of them will be
>>>>>>> between 1
>>>>>>> >> Gb/s and 10 Gb/s links, and with a bit of cross traffic, they can
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> >> turn into bottlenecks. This isn't like a narrowband GEO link of a
>>>>>>> few
>>>>>>> >> Mb/s where it's obvious where the dominant long latency
>>>>>>> bottleneck in
>>>>>>> >> your TCP connection's path is. Read: It's pretty hard to tell
>>>>>>> whether a
>>>>>>> >> drop in "speed" is due to a performance issue in the Starlink
>>>>>>> system or
>>>>>>> >> somewhere between Starlink's systems and the target system.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I see RTTs here between 20 ms and 250 ms, where the physical
>>>>>>> latency
>>>>>>> >> should be under 15 ms. So there's clearly a bit of buffer here
>>>>>>> along the
>>>>>>> >> chain that occasionally fills up.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Caveat 4: Handovers. Handover between birds and teleports is
>>>>>>> inevitably
>>>>>>> >> associated with a change in RTT and in most cases also available
>>>>>>> >> bandwidth. Plus your packets now arrive at a new queue on a new
>>>>>>> >> satellite while your TCP is still trying to respond to whatever it
>>>>>>> >> thought the queue on the previous bird was doing. Read: Whatever
>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>> >> cwnd is immediately after a handover, it's probably not what it
>>>>>>> should be.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I ran a somewhat hamstrung (sky view restricted) set of four Ookla
>>>>>>> >> speedtest.net tests each to five local servers. Average upload
>>>>>>> rate was
>>>>>>> >> 13 Mb/s, average down 75.5 Mb/s. Upload to the server of the ISP
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> >> Starlink seems to be buying its local connectivity from (Vocus
>>>>>>> Group)
>>>>>>> >> varied between 3.04 and 14.38 Mb/s, download between 23.33 and
>>>>>>> 52.22
>>>>>>> >> Mb/s, with RTTs between 37 and 56 ms not correlating well to rates
>>>>>>> >> observed. In fact, they were the ISP with consistently the worst
>>>>>>> rates.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Another ISP (MyRepublic) scored between 11.81 and 21.81 Mb/s up
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> >> between 106.5 and 183.8 Mb/s down, again with RTTs badly
>>>>>>> correlating
>>>>>>> >> with rates. Average RTT was the same as for Vocus.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Note the variation though: More or less a factor of two between
>>>>>>> highest
>>>>>>> >> and lowest rates for each ISP. Did MyRepublic just get lucky in my
>>>>>>> >> tests? Or is there something systematic behind this? Way too few
>>>>>>> tests
>>>>>>> >> to tell.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> What these tests do is establish a ballpark.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I'm currently repeating tests with dish placed on a trestle
>>>>>>> closer to
>>>>>>> >> the heavens. This seems to have translated into fewer outages /
>>>>>>> ping
>>>>>>> >> losses (around 1/4 of what I had yesterday with dishy on the
>>>>>>> ground on
>>>>>>> >> my deck). Still good enough for a lengthy video Skype call with
>>>>>>> my folks
>>>>>>> >> in Germany, although they did comment about reduced video
>>>>>>> quality. But
>>>>>>> >> maybe that was the lighting or the different background as I
>>>>>>> wasn't in
>>>>>>> >> my usual spot with my laptop when I called them.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Clear view of the sky is king for Starlink reliability. I've got
>>>>>>> my dishy mounted on the back fence, looking up over an empty field, so it's
>>>>>>> pretty much best-case scenario here.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> ****************************************************************
>>>>>>> >> Dr. Ulrich Speidel
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> School of Computer Science
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Room 303S.594 (City Campus)
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> The University of Auckland
>>>>>>> >> u.speidel at auckland.ac.nz
>>>>>>> >> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/
>>>>>>> >> ****************************************************************
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >> Starlink mailing list
>>>>>>> >> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> > Starlink mailing list
>>>>>>> > Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-6981366665607352320-FXtz
>>>>>>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Starlink mailing list
>>>>>> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work:
>>>
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-6981366665607352320-FXtz
>>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Starlink mailing list
>>> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20230113/8b90b592/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screenshot 2023-01-13 at 12.29.15 PM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1380606 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20230113/8b90b592/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screenshot 2023-01-13 at 1.30.03 PM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 855840 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20230113/8b90b592/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 296989 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20230113/8b90b592/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 222655 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20230113/8b90b592/attachment-0007.png>