<div dir="ltr"><div>> This would seem to wind up overloading the downlink to the gateway, as well<br>
as causing hard to predict fluctuations in bandwidth. This is definitely a<br>
complex situation where I can see buffers being added looks like a good<br>
cure-all.</div><div><br></div><div>We'll find out soon enough... Polar launches start in July. <br></div><div><br></div><div>> Do you know how traffic is being steered? I.e. how does the Gateway say</div>
which terminal traffic is to? All we know is that tweet "Simpler than IPv6"<br>
Some kind of SDN, but based upon what kind of discriminators?<br>
Are there circuits involved (ala ATM or PPPoE), tags like MPLS or 802.1Q?<div class="gmail-yj6qo gmail-ajU"><div id="gmail-:1a7" class="gmail-ajR" tabindex="0"><img class="gmail-ajT" src="https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif"><br></div><div id="gmail-:1a7" class="gmail-ajR" tabindex="0">My intuition would be that traffic is encap'd when it enters a PoP based on the destination IP, and the state of the constellation. The encapsulation could just be MPLS with a segment routing-like approach, it would contain the desired gateway, satellite, and terminal ID. <br></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 2:18 PM Michael Richardson <<a href="mailto:mcr@sandelman.ca">mcr@sandelman.ca</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
Mike Puchol <<a href="mailto:mike@starlink.sx" target="_blank">mike@starlink.sx</a>> wrote:<br>
> This is correct, with a few twists once you throw in inter-satellite<br>
> links. In future satellite versions, optical<br>
> links will allow satellites within the same orbital plane to use each<br>
> other as relays, thus providing coverage in areas not within a<br>
> gateway’s coverage.<br>
<br>
This would seem to wind up overloading the downlink to the gateway, as well<br>
as causing hard to predict fluctuations in bandwidth. This is definitely a<br>
complex situation where I can see buffers being added looks like a good<br>
cure-all.<br>
<br>
Allowing for direct terminal to terminal traffic would ultimately help<br>
as many of the latency sensitive things like gaming and video calls are often<br>
rather local.<br>
<br>
mcr> (Also, we talk about uplink/downlink from the point of view of the the end<br>
mcr> user station. But, are there better terms from the satellite's point of<br>
mcr> view to distinguish traffic to/from the end user?)<br>
<br>
> In general, downlink is anything from satellite to ground, be it<br>
> satellite -> gateway or satellite -> terminal, and uplink the reverse<br>
> path. These are the clearest terms to use IMHO. Thus, if satellite to<br>
> terminal has 75/25 DL/UL duty cycle, the satellite to gateway link will<br>
> be reversed, with 25/75 DL/UL duty cycle.<br>
<br>
Yeah, so in order to speak usefully about some of this stuff, I think we need<br>
to distinguish between traffic going "up" which is going towards the Gateway,<br>
from traffic which might be going "up" from the Gateway (or across from<br>
another satellite). Some additional terms would help. I had hoped that<br>
there were some :-)<br>
<br>
Do you know how traffic is being steered? I.e. how does the Gateway say<br>
which terminal traffic is to? All we know is that tweet "Simpler than IPv6"<br>
Some kind of SDN, but based upon what kind of discriminators?<br>
Are there circuits involved (ala ATM or PPPoE), tags like MPLS or 802.1Q?<br>
<br>
--<br>
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [<br>
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [<br>
] <a href="mailto:mcr@sandelman.ca" target="_blank">mcr@sandelman.ca</a> <a href="http://www.sandelman.ca/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.sandelman.ca/</a> | ruby on rails [<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>