<!DOCTYPE html><html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:f72428df-227c-4b62-9fa4-f2961b631007@gmail.com">
<p>Switching between IP video channels has a much longer latency
than switching a dial on an analog TV tuner. This latency is
also exhibited on radio listening, be it analog or digital DAB.<br>
</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote type="cite">I attribute that to buffer bloat and high
latency.</blockquote>
<p>It has multiple sources. I suspect the highest latency factor
is that of digital processing compared to analog processing; the
next factor of latency (by size) may be some buffers related to
data transmission, such as IP.</p>
<p>The digital processing has huge advantages over analog
processing but the large latency of switching between channels
(aka 'tuning in') is a clear inconvenient.<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There's a bit more than that. If you are getting your video
channel via IP off a CDN system, then there will need to be:</p>
<ul>
<li>A DNS lookup to see which CDN server is meant to serve your
channel, based on your IP address. This is usually done via
geolocation lookup, which can take some time.</li>
<li>Your client then needs to contact the CDN server, which may
need to import that stream from an origin server elsewhere. To
do that properly, it needs to get an idea as to how much
sustainable bandwidth there is between you and the CDN server,
so the CDN server knows which resolution to request from the
origin server.</li>
<li>The CDN server will then want to buffer some of the video to
make sure it's not going to suffer from buffer starvation if
there's a lag in timely delivery from the remote origin server.
That's so your video doesn't go stop-start all that often.</li>
<li>Last but not least, your client then also wants to buffer some
in order to be able to deal with irregular deliveries from the
CDN server in times of high jitter or packet loss. The more you
buffer, the less likely that you'll suffer disruption later.<br>
</li>
<li>With video encoding, there's also a need to buffer a few
frames just to be able to decode, which can add a part of a
second also.</li>
</ul>
Once that's all in place, latency and bufferbloat as such shouldn't
matter all that much theoretically, except of course that the
protocol that's feeding your client is often still TCP, and they
contribute to making life hell for TCP as it's struggling to match
its congestion window to the BDP, and the BDP keeps changing due to
the buffers filling and emptying. Most TCP connections in video
streaming therefore don't get their cwnd anywhere near BDP, as each
connection just downloads a chunk of video before the next one takes
over for the next chunk.
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:f72428df-227c-4b62-9fa4-f2961b631007@gmail.com">
<p> </p>
<p>Alex<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org">
<div class="">
<ul class="MailOutline">
<li class=""><br class="">
</li>
<li class="">With a happy household user watching streaming
media, a second user could have terrible shopping
experience with Amazon. The interactive response could be
(is often) horrible. (Personally, I would be doing email
and working on a shared doc. The Amazon analogy probably
applies to more people.)</li>
</ul>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">How can we deliver graceful performance to both
persons in a household?</div>
<div class="">Is seeking graceful performance too complicated
to improve?</div>
<div class="">(I said “graceful” to allow technical
flexibility.)</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div><br class="">
Gene<br class="">
----------------------------------------------<br class="">
Eugene Chang</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Apr 30, 2024, at 8:05 AM, Colin_Higbie
via Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div class="">[SM] How that? Capacity and latency are
largely independent... think a semi truck full of
harddisks from NYC to LA has decent
capacity/'bandwidth' but lousy latency...<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
Sebastian, nothing but agreement with you that
capacity and latency are largely independent (my old
dial-up modem connections 25 years ago at ~50kbps
had much lower latencies than my original
geostationary satellite connections with higher
bandwidth). I also agree that both are important in
their own ways. I had originally responded (this
thread seems to have come back to life from a few
months ago) to a point about 10Mbps capacity being
sufficient, and that as long as a user has a 10Mbps
connection, latency improvements would provide more
benefit to most users at that point than further
bandwidth increases. I responded that the minimum
"sufficient" metric should be higher than 10Mpbs,
probably at 25Mbps to support 4K HDR, which is the
streaming standard today and likely will be for the
foreseeable future. <br class="">
<br class="">
I have not seen any responses that provided a sound
argument against that conclusion. A lot of responses
like "but 8K is coming" (it's not, only experimental
YouTube videos showcase these resolutions to the
general public, no studio is making 8K content and
no streaming service offers anything in 8K or
higher) and "I don't need to watch 4K, 1080p is
sufficient for me, so it should be for everyone else
too" (personal preference should never be a
substitute for market data). Neither of those
arguments refutes objective industry standards:
25Mbps is the minimum required bandwidth for
multiple of the biggest streaming services.<br class="">
<br class="">
None of this intends to suggest that we should ease
off pressure on ISPs to provide low latency
connections that don't falter under load. Just want
to be sure we all recognize that the floor bandwidth
should be set no lower than 25Mbps. <br class="">
<br class="">
However, I would say that depending on usage, for a
typical family use, where 25Mbps is "sufficient" for
any single stream, even 50ms latency (not great, but
much better than a system will have with bad
bufferbloat problems that can easily fall to the
hundreds of milliseconds) is also "sufficient" for
all but specialized applications or competitive
gaming. I would also say that if you already have
latency at or below 20ms, further gains on latency
will be imperceptible to almost all users, where
bandwidth increases will at least allow for more
simultaneous connections, even if any given stream
doesn't really benefit much beyond about 25Mbps. <br class="">
<br class="">
I would also say that for working remotely, for
those of us who work with large audio or video
files, the ability to transfer multi-hundred MB
files from a 1Gbps connection in several seconds
instead of several minutes for a 25Mbps connection
is a meaningful boost to work effectiveness and
productivity, where a latency reduction from 50ms to
10ms wouldn't really yield any material changes to
our work.<br class="">
<br class="">
Is 100Mbps and 10ms latency better than 25Mbps and
50ms latency? Of course. Moving to ever more
capacity and lower latencies is a good thing on both
fronts, but where hardware and engineering costs
tend to scale non-linearly as you start pushing
against current limits, "sufficiency" is an
important metric to keep in mind. Cost matters.<br class="">
<br class="">
Cheers,<br class="">
Colin<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
-----Original Message-----<br class="">
From: Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>>
On Behalf Of <a href="mailto:starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 10:41 AM<br class="">
To: <a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 11<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
Message: 1<br class="">
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:32:51 +0200<br class="">
From: Sebastian Moeller <<a href="mailto:moeller0@gmx.de" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">moeller0@gmx.de</a>><br class="">
To: Alexandre Petrescu <<a href="mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com</a>><br class="">
Cc: Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It’s the Latency, FCC<br class="">
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:D3B2FA53-589F-4F35-958C-4679EC4414D9@gmx.de" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">D3B2FA53-589F-4F35-958C-4679EC4414D9@gmx.de</a>><br class="">
Content-Type: text/plain;<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>charset=utf-8<br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Alexandre,<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">On 30. Apr 2024, at
16:25, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
Colin,<br class="">
8K usefulness over 4K: the higher the resolution
the more it will be possible to zoom in into
paused images. It is one of the advantages.
People dont do that a lot these days but why not
in the future.<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
[SM] Because that is how in the past we envisioned
the future, see here <a href="h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHwjceFcF2Q" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHwjceFcF2Q</a>
'enhance'...<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Spotify lower
quality than CD and still usable: one would check
not Spotify, but other services for audiophiles;
some of these use 'DSD' formats which go way
beyond the so called high-def audio of 384khz
sampling freqs. They dont 'stream' but download.
It is these higher-than-384khz sampling rates
equivalent (e.g. DSD1024 is the equivalent of, I
think of something like 10 times CD quality, I
think). If Spotify is the king of streamers, in
the future other companies might become the kings
of something else than 'streaming', a name yet to
be invented.<br class="">
For each of them, it is true, normal use will not
expose any more advantage than the previous
version (no advantage of 8K over 4K, no advantage
of 88KHz DVD audio over CD, etc) - yet the
progress is ongoing on and on, and nobody comes
back to CD or to DVD audio or to SD (standard
definition video).<br class="">
Finally, 8K and DSD per se are requirements of
just bandwidth. The need of latency should be
exposed there, and that is not straightforward.
But higher bandwidths will come with lower
latencies anyways. <br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
[SM] How that? Capacity and latency are largely
independent... think a semi truck full of harddisks
from NYC to LA has decent capacity/'bandwidth' but
lousy latency...<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">The quest of
latency requirements might be, in fact, a quest to
see how one could use that low latency technology
that is possible and available anyways.<br class="">
Alex<br class="">
Le 30/04/2024 à 16:00, Colin_Higbie via Starlink a
écrit :<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">David Fernández,
those bitrates are safe numbers, but many
streams could get by with less at those
resolutions. H.265 compression is at a variable
bit rate with simpler scenes requiring less
bandwidth. Note that 4K with HDR (30 bits per
pixel rather than 24) consistently also fits
within 25Mbps.<br class="">
<br class="">
David Lang, HDR is a requirement for 4K
programming. That is not to say that all 4K
streams are in HDR, but in setting a required
bandwidth, because 4K signals can include HDR,
the required bandwidth must accommodate and
allow for HDR. That said, I believe all modern
4K programming on Netflix and Amazon Prime is
HDR. Note David Fernández' point that Spain
independently reached the same conclusion as the
US streaming services of 25Mbps requirement for
4K.<br class="">
<br class="">
Visually, to a person watching and assuming an
OLED (or microLED) display capable of showing
the full color and contrast gamut of HDR (LCD
can't really do it justice, even with miniLED
backlighting), the move to HDR from SDR is more
meaningful in most situations than the move from
1080p to 4K. I don't believe going to further
resolutions, scenes beyond 4K (e.g., 8K), will
add anything meaningful to a movie or television
viewer over 4K. Video games could benefit from
the added resolution, but lens aberration in
cameras along with focal length and limited
depth of field render blurriness of even a sharp
picture greater than the pixel size in most
scenes beyond about 4K - 5.5K. Video games don’t
suffer this problem because those scenes are
rendered, eliminating problems from camera
lenses. So video games may still benefit from 8K
resolution, but streaming programming won’t. <br class="">
<br class="">
There is precedent for this in the audio
streaming world: audio streaming bitrates have
retracted from prior peaks. Even though 48kHz
and higher bitrate audio available on DVD is
superior to the audio quality of 44.1kHz CDs,
Spotify and Apple and most other streaming
services stream music at LOWER quality than CD.
It’s good enough for most people to not notice
the difference. I don’t see much push in the
foreseeable future for programming beyond UHD
(4K + HDR). That’s not to say never, but there’s
no real benefit to it with current camera tech
and screen sizes. <br class="">
<br class="">
Conclusion: for video streaming needs over the
next decade or so, 25Mbps should be appropriate.
As David Fernández rightly points out, H.266 and
other future protocols will improve compression
capabilities and reduce bandwidth needs at any
given resolution and color bit depth, adding a
bit more headroom for small improvements. <br class="">
<br class="">
Cheers,<br class="">
Colin<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
-----Original Message-----<br class="">
From: Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>>
On Behalf Of <br class="">
<a href="mailto:starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 9:31 AM<br class="">
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
Message: 2<br class="">
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:54:20 +0200<br class="">
From: David Fernández <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:davidfdzp@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><davidfdzp@gmail.com></a><br class="">
To: starlink <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It’s the Latency, FCC<br class="">
Message-ID:<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CAC=tZ0rrmWJUNLvGupw6K8ogADcYLq-eyW7Bjb209oNDWGfVSA@mail.gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><CAC=tZ0rrmWJUNLvGupw6K8ogADcYLq-eyW7Bjb209oNDWGfVSA@mail.gmail.com></a><br class="">
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br class="">
<br class="">
Last February, TV broadcasting in Spain left
behind SD definitively and moved to HD as
standard quality, also starting to regularly
broadcast a channel with 4K quality.<br class="">
<br class="">
A 4K video (2160p) at 30 frames per second,
handled with the HEVC compression codec (H.265),
and using 24 bits per pixel, requires 25 Mbit/s.<br class="">
<br class="">
Full HD video (1080p) requires 10 Mbit/s.<br class="">
<br class="">
For lots of 4K video encoded at < 20 Mbit/s,
it may be hard to distinguish it visually from
the HD version of the same video (this was also
confirmed by SBTVD Forum Tests).<br class="">
<br class="">
Then, 8K will come, eventually, requiring a
minimum of ~32 Mbit/s:<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-taking-sh" moz-do-not-send="true">https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-taking-sh</a><br class="">
ape-in-europe<br class="">
<br class="">
The latest codec VVC (H.266) may reduce the
required data rates by at least 27%, at the
expense of more computing power required, but
somehow it is claimed it will be more energy
efficient.<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8k-broa" moz-do-not-send="true">https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8k-broa</a><br class="">
dcast-and-broadband-television<br class="">
<br class="">
Regards,<br class="">
<br class="">
David<br class="">
<br class="">
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 19:16:27 -0700 (PDT)<br class="">
From: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a><br class="">
To: Colin_Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CHigbie1@Higbie.name" moz-do-not-send="true"><CHigbie1@Higbie.name></a><br class="">
Cc: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a>,
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">"starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Itʼs the Latency, FCC<br class="">
Message-ID: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:srss5qrq-7973-5q87-823p-30pn7o308608@ynat.uz" moz-do-not-send="true"><srss5qrq-7973-5q87-823p-30pn7o308608@ynat.uz></a><br class="">
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8";
Format="flowed"<br class="">
<br class="">
Amazon, youtube set explicitly to 4k (I didn't
say HDR)<br class="">
<br class="">
David Lang<br class="">
<br class="">
On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Colin_Higbie wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Date: Tue, 30
Apr 2024 01:30:21 +0000<br class="">
From: Colin_Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CHigbie1@Higbie.name" moz-do-not-send="true"><CHigbie1@Higbie.name></a><br class="">
To: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a><br class="">
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">"starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"</a>
<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: RE: [Starlink] Itʼs the Latency, FCC<br class="">
<br class="">
Was that 4K HDR (not SDR) using the standard
protocols that <br class="">
streaming<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
services use (Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+,
etc.) or was it just some YouTube 4K SDR videos?
YouTube will show "HDR" on the gear icon for
content that's 4K HDR. If it only shows "4K"
instead of "HDR," then means it's SDR.<br class="">
Note that if YouTube, if left to the default of
Auto for streaming resolution it will also
automatically drop the quality to something that
fits within the bandwidth and most of the "4K"
content on YouTube is low-quality and not true
UHD content (even beyond missing HDR). For
example, many smartphones will record 4K video,
but their optics are not sufficient to actually
have distinct per-pixel image detail, meaning it
compresses down to a smaller image with no real
additional loss in picture quality, but only
because it's really a 4K UHD stream to begin
with.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Note that 4K
video compression codecs are lossy, so the
lower <br class="">
quality the<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
initial image, the lower the bandwidth needed to
convey the stream w/o additional quality loss.
The needed bandwidth also changes with scene
complexity. Falling confetti, like on Newy
Year's Eve or at the Super Bowl make for one of
the most demanding scenes. Lots of detailed fire
and explosions with fast-moving fast panning
full dynamic backgrounds are also tough for a
compressed signal to preserve (but not as hard
as a screen full of falling confetti).<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">I'm dubious
that 8Mbps can handle that except for some of
the <br class="">
simplest<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
video, like cartoons or fairly static scenes
like the news. Those scenes don't require much
data, but that's not the case for all 4K HDR
scenes by any means.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">It's obviously
in Netflix and the other streaming services'
interest <br class="">
to<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
be able to sell their more expensive 4K HDR
service to as many people as possible. There's a
reason they won't offer it to anyone with less
than 25Mbps – they don't want the complaints and
service calls. Now, to be fair, 4K HDR
definitely doesn’t typically require 25Mbps, but
it's to their credit that they do include a
small bandwidth buffer. In my experience
monitoring bandwidth usage for 4K HDR streaming,
15Mbps is the minimum if doing nothing else and
that will frequently fall short, depending on
the 4K HDR content.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Cheers,<br class="">
Colin<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
-----Original Message-----<br class="">
From: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a><br class="">
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2024 8:40 PM<br class="">
To: Colin Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:colin.higbie@scribl.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><colin.higbie@scribl.com></a><br class="">
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Itʼs the Latency, FCC<br class="">
<br class="">
hmm, before my DSL got disconnected (the
carrier decided they didn't <br class="">
want<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
to support it any more), I could stream 4k at
8Mb down if there <br class="">
wasn't too much other activity on the network
(doing so at 2x speed <br class="">
was a problem)<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">David Lang<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On Fri, 15 Mar 2024, Colin Higbie via Starlink
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Date: Fri, 15
Mar 2024 18:32:36 +0000<br class="">
From: Colin Higbie via Starlink <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Reply-To: Colin Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:colin.higbie@scribl.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><colin.higbie@scribl.com></a><br class="">
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">"starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"</a>
<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It’s the Latency,
FCC<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">I have now
been trying to break the common conflation
that <br class="">
download<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
"speed"<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">means
anything at all for day to day, minute to
minute, second to <br class="">
second, use, once you crack 10mbit, now,
for over 14 years. Am I <br class="">
succeeding? I lost the 25/10 battle, and
keep pointing at really <br class="">
terrible latency under load and wifi
weirdnesses for many existing<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
100/20 services today.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">While I
completely agree that latency has bigger
impact on how<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
responsive the Internet feels to use, I do think
that 10Mbit is too low for some standard
applications regardless of latency: with the
more recent availability of 4K and higher
streaming, that does require a higher minimum
bandwidth to work at all. One could argue that
no one NEEDS 4K streaming, but many families
would view this as an important part of what
they do with their Internet (Starlink makes this
reliably possible at our farmhouse). 4K
HDR-supporting TV's are among the most popular
TVs being purchased in the U.S. today. Netflix,
Amazon, Max, Disney and other streaming services
provide a substantial portion of 4K HDR content.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">So, I agree
that 25/10 is sufficient, for up to 4k HDR
streaming. <br class="">
100/20<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
would provide plenty of bandwidth for multiple
concurrent 4K users or a 1-2 8K streams.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">For me, not
claiming any special expertise on market
needs, just my <br class="">
own<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
personal assessment on what typical families
will need and care about:<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Latency:
below 50ms under load always feels good
except for some <br class="">
intensive gaming (I don't see any benefit to
getting loaded latency <br class="">
further below ~20ms for typical
applications, with an exception for <br class="">
cloud-based gaming that benefits with lower
latency all the way <br class="">
down to about 5ms for young, really fast
players, the rest of us <br class="">
won't be able to tell the difference)<br class="">
<br class="">
Download Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough if
not doing UHD video <br class="">
streaming<br class="">
<br class="">
Download Bandwidth: 25 - 100Mbps if doing
UHD video streaming, <br class="">
depending on # of streams or if wanting to
be ready for 8k<br class="">
<br class="">
Upload Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough for
quality video <br class="">
conferencing, higher only needed for
multiple concurrent outbound <br class="">
streams<br class="">
<br class="">
So, for example (and ignoring upload for
this), I would rather have<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
latency at 50ms (under load) and DL bandwidth of
25Mbps than latency of 1ms with a max bandwidth
of 10Mbps, because the super-low latency doesn't
solve the problem with insufficient bandwidth to
watch 4K HDR content. But, I'd also rather have
latency of 20ms with 100Mbps DL, then latency
that exceeds 100ms under load with 1Gbps DL
bandwidth. I think the important thing is to
reach "good enough" on both, not just excel at
one while falling short of "good enough" on the
other.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Note that
Starlink handles all of this well, including
kids <br class="">
watching<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
YouTube while my wife and I watch 4K UHD
Netflix, except the upload speed occasionally
tops at under 3Mbps for me, causing quality
degradation for outbound video calls (or used
to, it seems to have gotten better in recent
months – no problems since sometime in 2023).<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Cheers,<br class="">
Colin<br class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML
attachment was <br class="">
scrubbed...<br class="">
URL: <br class="">
<<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/2024043" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/2024043</a><br class="">
0/5572b78b/attachment-0001.html> <br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
Message: 2<br class="">
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:40:58 +0200<br class="">
From: Alexandre Petrescu <<a href="mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com</a>><br class="">
To: Sebastian Moeller <<a href="mailto:moeller0@gmx.de" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">moeller0@gmx.de</a>><br class="">
Cc: Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It’s the Latency, FCC<br class="">
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:727b07d9-9dc3-43b7-8e17-50b6b7a4444a@gmail.com" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">727b07d9-9dc3-43b7-8e17-50b6b7a4444a@gmail.com</a>><br class="">
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
format=flowed<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
Le 30/04/2024 à 16:32, Sebastian Moeller a écrit :<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Alexandre,<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">On 30. Apr 2024,
at 16:25, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
Colin,<br class="">
8K usefulness over 4K: the higher the resolution
the more it will be possible to zoom in into
paused images. It is one of the advantages.
People dont do that a lot these days but why
not in the future.<br class="">
</blockquote>
[SM] Because that is how in the past we envisioned
the future, see here <a href="h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHwjceFcF2Q" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHwjceFcF2Q</a>
'enhance'...<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Spotify lower
quality than CD and still usable: one would
check not Spotify, but other services for
audiophiles; some of these use 'DSD' formats
which go way beyond the so called high-def audio
of 384khz sampling freqs. They dont 'stream'
but download. It is these higher-than-384khz
sampling rates equivalent (e.g. DSD1024 is the
equivalent of, I think of something like 10
times CD quality, I think). If Spotify is the
king of streamers, in the future other companies
might become the kings of something else than
'streaming', a name yet to be invented.<br class="">
For each of them, it is true, normal use will
not expose any more advantage than the previous
version (no advantage of 8K over 4K, no
advantage of 88KHz DVD audio over CD, etc) - yet
the progress is ongoing on and on, and nobody
comes back to CD or to DVD audio or to SD
(standard definition video).<br class="">
Finally, 8K and DSD per se are requirements of
just bandwidth. The need of latency should be
exposed there, and that is not straightforward.
But higher bandwidths will come with lower
latencies anyways.<br class="">
</blockquote>
[SM] How that? Capacity and latency are largely
independent... think a semi truck full of
harddisks from NYC to LA has decent
capacity/'bandwidth' but lousy latency...<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
I agree with you: two distinct parameters, bandwidth
and latency. But they evolve simultenously,
relatively bound by a constant relationship. For any
particular link technology (satcom is one) the
bandwidth and latency are in a constant
relationship. One grows, the other diminishes.
There are exceptions too, in some details.<br class="">
<br class="">
(as for the truck full of harddisks, and jumbo jets
full of DVDs - they are just concepts: striking good
examples of how enormous bandwidths are possible,
but still to see in practice; physicsts also talked
about a train transported by a train transported by
a train and so on, to overcome the speed of light:
another striking example, but not in practice).<br class="">
<br class="">
Alex<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">The quest of
latency requirements might be, in fact, a quest
to see how one could use that low latency
technology that is possible and available
anyways.<br class="">
Alex<br class="">
Le 30/04/2024 à 16:00, Colin_Higbie via Starlink
a écrit :<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">David
Fernández, those bitrates are safe numbers,
but many streams could get by with less at
those resolutions. H.265 compression is at a
variable bit rate with simpler scenes
requiring less bandwidth. Note that 4K with
HDR (30 bits per pixel rather than 24)
consistently also fits within 25Mbps.<br class="">
<br class="">
David Lang, HDR is a requirement for 4K
programming. That is not to say that all 4K
streams are in HDR, but in setting a required
bandwidth, because 4K signals can include HDR,
the required bandwidth must accommodate and
allow for HDR. That said, I believe all modern
4K programming on Netflix and Amazon Prime is
HDR. Note David Fernández' point that Spain
independently reached the same conclusion as
the US streaming services of 25Mbps
requirement for 4K.<br class="">
<br class="">
Visually, to a person watching and assuming an
OLED (or microLED) display capable of showing
the full color and contrast gamut of HDR (LCD
can't really do it justice, even with miniLED
backlighting), the move to HDR from SDR is
more meaningful in most situations than the
move from 1080p to 4K. I don't believe going
to further resolutions, scenes beyond 4K
(e.g., 8K), will add anything meaningful to a
movie or television viewer over 4K. Video
games could benefit from the added resolution,
but lens aberration in cameras along with
focal length and limited depth of field render
blurriness of even a sharp picture greater
than the pixel size in most scenes beyond
about 4K - 5.5K. Video games don’t suffer this
problem because those scenes are rendered,
eliminating problems from camera lenses. So
video games may still benefit from 8K
resolution, but streaming programming won’t.<br class="">
<br class="">
There is precedent for this in the audio
streaming world: audio streaming bitrates have
retracted from prior peaks. Even though 48kHz
and higher bitrate audio available on DVD is
superior to the audio quality of 44.1kHz CDs,
Spotify and Apple and most other streaming
services stream music at LOWER quality than
CD. It’s good enough for most people to not
notice the difference. I don’t see much push
in the foreseeable future for programming
beyond UHD (4K + HDR). That’s not to say
never, but there’s no real benefit to it with
current camera tech and screen sizes.<br class="">
<br class="">
Conclusion: for video streaming needs over the
next decade or so, 25Mbps should be
appropriate. As David Fernández rightly points
out, H.266 and other future protocols will
improve compression capabilities and reduce
bandwidth needs at any given resolution and
color bit depth, adding a bit more headroom
for small improvements.<br class="">
<br class="">
Cheers,<br class="">
Colin<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
-----Original Message-----<br class="">
From: Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>>
On Behalf Of <br class="">
<a href="mailto:starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 9:31 AM<br class="">
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
Message: 2<br class="">
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:54:20 +0200<br class="">
From: David Fernández <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:davidfdzp@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><davidfdzp@gmail.com></a><br class="">
To: starlink <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It’s the Latency, FCC<br class="">
Message-ID:<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CAC=tZ0rrmWJUNLvGupw6K8ogADcYLq-eyW7Bjb209oNDWGfVSA@mail.gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><CAC=tZ0rrmWJUNLvGupw6K8ogADcYLq-eyW7Bjb209oNDWGfVSA@mail.gmail.com></a><br class="">
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br class="">
<br class="">
Last February, TV broadcasting in Spain left
behind SD definitively and moved to HD as
standard quality, also starting to regularly
broadcast a channel with 4K quality.<br class="">
<br class="">
A 4K video (2160p) at 30 frames per second,
handled with the HEVC compression codec
(H.265), and using 24 bits per pixel, requires
25 Mbit/s.<br class="">
<br class="">
Full HD video (1080p) requires 10 Mbit/s.<br class="">
<br class="">
For lots of 4K video encoded at < 20
Mbit/s, it may be hard to distinguish it
visually from the HD version of the same video
(this was also confirmed by SBTVD Forum
Tests).<br class="">
<br class="">
Then, 8K will come, eventually, requiring a
minimum of ~32 Mbit/s:<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-taking-s" moz-do-not-send="true">https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-taking-s</a><br class="">
hape-in-europe<br class="">
<br class="">
The latest codec VVC (H.266) may reduce the
required data rates by at least 27%, at the
expense of more computing power required, but
somehow it is claimed it will be more energy
efficient.<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8k-bro" moz-do-not-send="true">https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8k-bro</a><br class="">
adcast-and-broadband-television<br class="">
<br class="">
Regards,<br class="">
<br class="">
David<br class="">
<br class="">
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 19:16:27 -0700 (PDT)<br class="">
From: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a><br class="">
To: Colin_Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CHigbie1@Higbie.name" moz-do-not-send="true"><CHigbie1@Higbie.name></a><br class="">
Cc: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a>,
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">"starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Itʼs the Latency, FCC<br class="">
Message-ID: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:srss5qrq-7973-5q87-823p-30pn7o308608@ynat.uz" moz-do-not-send="true"><srss5qrq-7973-5q87-823p-30pn7o308608@ynat.uz></a><br class="">
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8";
Format="flowed"<br class="">
<br class="">
Amazon, youtube set explicitly to 4k (I didn't
say HDR)<br class="">
<br class="">
David Lang<br class="">
<br class="">
On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Colin_Higbie wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Date: Tue, 30
Apr 2024 01:30:21 +0000<br class="">
From: Colin_Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CHigbie1@Higbie.name" moz-do-not-send="true"><CHigbie1@Higbie.name></a><br class="">
To: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a><br class="">
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">"starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"</a>
<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: RE: [Starlink] Itʼs the Latency,
FCC<br class="">
<br class="">
Was that 4K HDR (not SDR) using the standard
protocols that <br class="">
streaming<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
services use (Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+,
etc.) or was it just some YouTube 4K SDR
videos? YouTube will show "HDR" on the gear
icon for content that's 4K HDR. If it only
shows "4K" instead of "HDR," then means it's
SDR.<br class="">
Note that if YouTube, if left to the default
of Auto for streaming resolution it will also
automatically drop the quality to something
that fits within the bandwidth and most of the
"4K" content on YouTube is low-quality and not
true UHD content (even beyond missing HDR).
For example, many smartphones will record 4K
video, but their optics are not sufficient to
actually have distinct per-pixel image detail,
meaning it compresses down to a smaller image
with no real additional loss in picture
quality, but only because it's really a 4K UHD
stream to begin with.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Note that 4K
video compression codecs are lossy, so the
lower <br class="">
quality the<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
initial image, the lower the bandwidth needed
to convey the stream w/o additional quality
loss. The needed bandwidth also changes with
scene complexity. Falling confetti, like on
Newy Year's Eve or at the Super Bowl make for
one of the most demanding scenes. Lots of
detailed fire and explosions with fast-moving
fast panning full dynamic backgrounds are also
tough for a compressed signal to preserve (but
not as hard as a screen full of falling
confetti).<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">I'm dubious
that 8Mbps can handle that except for some
of the <br class="">
simplest<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
video, like cartoons or fairly static scenes
like the news. Those scenes don't require much
data, but that's not the case for all 4K HDR
scenes by any means.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">It's
obviously in Netflix and the other streaming
services' <br class="">
interest to<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
be able to sell their more expensive 4K HDR
service to as many people as possible. There's
a reason they won't offer it to anyone with
less than 25Mbps – they don't want the
complaints and service calls. Now, to be fair,
4K HDR definitely doesn’t typically require
25Mbps, but it's to their credit that they do
include a small bandwidth buffer. In my
experience monitoring bandwidth usage for 4K
HDR streaming, 15Mbps is the minimum if doing
nothing else and that will frequently fall
short, depending on the 4K HDR content.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Cheers,<br class="">
Colin<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
-----Original Message-----<br class="">
From: David Lang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:david@lang.hm" moz-do-not-send="true"><david@lang.hm></a><br class="">
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2024 8:40 PM<br class="">
To: Colin Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:colin.higbie@scribl.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><colin.higbie@scribl.com></a><br class="">
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Itʼs the Latency,
FCC<br class="">
<br class="">
hmm, before my DSL got disconnected (the
carrier decided they <br class="">
didn't want<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
to support it any more), I could stream 4k at
8Mb down if there <br class="">
wasn't too much other activity on the network
(doing so at 2x speed <br class="">
was a problem)<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">David Lang<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On Fri, 15 Mar 2024, Colin Higbie via
Starlink wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Date: Fri,
15 Mar 2024 18:32:36 +0000<br class="">
From: Colin Higbie via Starlink <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Reply-To: Colin Higbie <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:colin.higbie@scribl.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><colin.higbie@scribl.com></a><br class="">
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">"starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"</a>
<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true"><starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net></a><br class="">
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It’s the Latency,
FCC<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">I have
now been trying to break the common
conflation that <br class="">
download<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
"speed"<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">means
anything at all for day to day, minute
to minute, second to <br class="">
second, use, once you crack 10mbit, now,
for over 14 years. Am I <br class="">
succeeding? I lost the 25/10 battle, and
keep pointing at really <br class="">
terrible latency under load and wifi
weirdnesses for many <br class="">
existing<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
100/20 services today.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">While I
completely agree that latency has bigger
impact on how<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
responsive the Internet feels to use, I do
think that 10Mbit is too low for some standard
applications regardless of latency: with the
more recent availability of 4K and higher
streaming, that does require a higher minimum
bandwidth to work at all. One could argue that
no one NEEDS 4K streaming, but many families
would view this as an important part of what
they do with their Internet (Starlink makes
this reliably possible at our farmhouse). 4K
HDR-supporting TV's are among the most popular
TVs being purchased in the U.S. today.
Netflix, Amazon, Max, Disney and other
streaming services provide a substantial
portion of 4K HDR content.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">So, I agree
that 25/10 is sufficient, for up to 4k HDR
streaming.<br class="">
100/20<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
would provide plenty of bandwidth for multiple
concurrent 4K users or a 1-2 8K streams.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">For me, not
claiming any special expertise on market
needs, just <br class="">
my own<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
personal assessment on what typical families
will need and care about:<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Latency:
below 50ms under load always feels good
except for some <br class="">
intensive gaming (I don't see any benefit
to getting loaded <br class="">
latency further below ~20ms for typical
applications, with an <br class="">
exception for cloud-based gaming that
benefits with lower latency <br class="">
all the way down to about 5ms for young,
really fast players, the <br class="">
rest of us won't be able to tell the
difference)<br class="">
<br class="">
Download Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough if
not doing UHD video <br class="">
streaming<br class="">
<br class="">
Download Bandwidth: 25 - 100Mbps if doing
UHD video streaming, <br class="">
depending on # of streams or if wanting to
be ready for 8k<br class="">
<br class="">
Upload Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough for
quality video <br class="">
conferencing, higher only needed for
multiple concurrent outbound <br class="">
streams<br class="">
<br class="">
So, for example (and ignoring upload for
this), I would rather <br class="">
have<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
latency at 50ms (under load) and DL bandwidth
of 25Mbps than latency of 1ms with a max
bandwidth of 10Mbps, because the super-low
latency doesn't solve the problem with
insufficient bandwidth to watch 4K HDR
content. But, I'd also rather have latency of
20ms with 100Mbps DL, then latency that
exceeds 100ms under load with 1Gbps DL
bandwidth. I think the important thing is to
reach "good enough" on both, not just excel at
one while falling short of "good enough" on
the other.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Note that
Starlink handles all of this well,
including kids <br class="">
watching<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
YouTube while my wife and I watch 4K UHD
Netflix, except the upload speed occasionally
tops at under 3Mbps for me, causing quality
degradation for outbound video calls (or used
to, it seems to have gotten better in recent
months – no problems since sometime in 2023).<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Cheers,<br class="">
Colin<br class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
-------------- next part -------------- An
HTML attachment was <br class="">
scrubbed...<br class="">
URL: <br class="">
<<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/202404" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/202404</a><br class="">
30/5572b78b/attachment-0001.html> <br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<br class="">
------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
Subject: Digest Footer<br class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
End of Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 11<br class="">
****************************************<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Starlink mailing list<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" moz-do-not-send="true">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
****************************************************************
Dr. Ulrich Speidel
School of Computer Science
Room 303S.594 (City Campus)
The University of Auckland
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:u.speidel@auckland.ac.nz">u.speidel@auckland.ac.nz</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/">http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/</a>
****************************************************************
</pre>
</body>
</html>