Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem

[Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3047 bytes --]

This is pretty impressive... and also is a decent counter against the common argument that at BNG/backbone information rates flow queuing would be completely infeasible... or it might show that big iron silicon is just inferior to general purpose CPUs

On 7 June 2024 04:28:18 CEST, Dave Taht via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>I occasionally am happy to point out the 150+ isps now running libreqos and
>cake... the several hundred running preseem and paraqum and bequant...
>
>As a rule of thumb about 10k wisp subscribers eat around 25gbit. This we
>(libreqos anyway) can do easily on a 1500 dollar whitebox (and we have
>pushed it past 60gbit in the v1.5 release entering beta shortly). This is
>usually way more capability than any given isp network segment needs...
>
>The wisps have got fq codel available native in much of their gear too, and
>of course starlink on their wifi...
>
>There are probably 60k isps left to go though. There are isps still on
>docsis 3.0.  I tend to regard these issues nowadays as being demand side as
>these solutions are so widely available now...
>
>But with billions being spent to just upgrade to fiber... a dark cloud
>ahead is above 50mbit most of the bloat moves to the wifi... and despite
>eero, openwrt, Google fiber etc that have been getting it right... sigh.
>
>A bright light at the moment there is all the wifi products coming out with
>a mt79 chip.
>
>On Thu, Jun 6, 2024, 10:51 AM Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 4, 2024, at 16:03, Rich Brown <richb.hanover@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Yeah... I didn't write that as carefully as I could have. I was
>> switching between "user voice" (who'll say 'speed') and "expert" voice (I
>> know the difference). Check it now:
>> https://randomneuronsfiring.com/all-the-reasons-that-bufferbloat-isnt-a-problem/
>>
>> Thanks for doing that.
>>
>> How about also changing “new faster ISP plan” to “new bigger ISP plan”? I
>> know that may sound like a slightly weird phrase, but getting people’s
>> attention by surprising them a little can be beneficial. If it looks weird
>> to them and that makes them pause and think, then that’s good.
>>
>> If the hypothetical ISP imagined here were actually willing to offer a
>> plan that truly provided consistently *faster* connectivity instead of just
>> more of the same, we’d be very happy. The truth today is that most IPs
>> offer *bigger*, not *better*. They are selling quantity, not quality.
>>
>> (I am intentionally not lumping *all* ISPs into the same bucket here.
>> Some, like Comcast, are actually making big efforts to improve quality as
>> well as quantity. Comcast dramatically reduced the working latency of my
>> cable modem during the work-from-home pandemic, and they continue to work
>> on improving that even more. I want to be sure to give credit where it is
>> deserved.)
>>
>> Stuart Cheshire
>>
>>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4023 bytes --]