[Starlink] Re: Starlink Digest, Vol 53, Issue 14

[Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>]

Sebastian Moeller via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
    > I fully agree and am quite puzzled to find zero references in the SCONE
    > draft for any experiments, let alone successful ones that demonstrate
    > the value SCONE might deliver.
    > In my world one starts with such experiments and only writes an
    > internet draft if these experiments demonstrated that an idea has legs
    > to stand on.

I regularly attend the SCONE virtual interim meetings.

I think that there is more occuring than is being published, and I think that
the candidate TRONE and TRAIN and (was there a 3rd?) ideas did have some
spike solutions created.

but, back to my original question:  is there sufficient feedback in the
*starlink* datapath from downlink'ing Satellite, through ISL, to Ground
Station about the actual experienced congestion such that either:
a) packets could be dropped before wasting satellite capacity
b) SCONE (or another mark, including L4S, whether you believe it or not),
   could be applied?

How much does that available bandwidth vary during each of the 15minute
attachments?


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide