From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x632.google.com (mail-pl1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B98FD3B29D for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:51:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x632.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1e3ff14f249so1561975ad.1 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:51:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ieee.org; s=google; t=1714506680; x=1715111480; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YGqA+4iFuFJy4XKH7W6DP/OCrVgSvI2xUQSoRXgP6e8=; b=WTYqde7EPn9CftAc7XOJe2Nt/srAeOcIlvc7FHLmcWz7Fz9V+aNBizqmPxcCfWsRaQ LzeTMsY3sO7YWMlD6sxmSn9qP1hVYC6toL5e/z9aHxzB1iIp4AzIyWkB10Ff9tjt+fui h5gsI4+x+Qid6luk7U5i1z5BeoAJQ6xhYRZ9Y= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1714506680; x=1715111480; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YGqA+4iFuFJy4XKH7W6DP/OCrVgSvI2xUQSoRXgP6e8=; b=KgYIpIuxi7NEH8YSF++hOU6UZ1sT3uCTzdeyQgajD80JsELQzC53RPGu0Y6KBj1BoT BVgO6NiTyir2yl18s9i3BXbTRh+9c7TJM5CCFdbtnHfU4zNrMjQ3klH8q5CgJq72FGe+ f0O4Jl091P3O6vFGnAb1z8ljHr4N3QLoxJmtG/wPsuDRdFs7R9orZB1UjJLRgzlFtvNF HEMZ2xWtSugjvTpSlP8rfGUmHnerNaXnBJSAknydF69r6eLuX5PP0LHTPx1VY4HCGBoB 6bSU1b2vpe9hsVj5IgJChY7D569Y2DdvOJaBv7Pn3Tu8H2USh82KgI6/kn8YLPyNUDAh 0kCg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXhV3jBh0B966tRrPo4tESq8OkGVHvDhPbB5HN2450uJXdWOyFRmbldirzQDXW9p68j4sWMEUBHiUTlBaqrp8JYzrwnTEBa3oIf7w+XBSI= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzyJmEPVSwMHW7Zoe8HDvJh6s21H1IyEWH+/NsodVY0fWG9+Pet /S39SQzBNwkn2kv1SXWgkez/4n/uKi4gnVHPsDUtJ68H6gAswJvWdVvNURvv4A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHXTmaddk6l/w7T7o8gQXaSnw56+rRG8FvaSRCfNuzRciDiSyb81MOwUzpbpMahyUPQmfGqkg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:c943:b0:1e2:58b7:2dd6 with SMTP id i3-20020a170902c94300b001e258b72dd6mr5923236pla.21.1714506680286; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:51:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (dhcp-72-253-194-45.hawaiiantel.net. [72.253.194.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l12-20020a170902d34c00b001eb0e9e14b0sm199146plk.207.2024.04.30.12.51.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:51:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Eugene Y Chang Message-Id: <1A972680-ECA5-42CA-BE8B-6BBD46FF5E74@ieee.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CFF8F858-A311-4C5F-B5F8-33CEDAAEB867"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.8\)) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:51:17 -1000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Eugene Y Chang , Dave Taht via Starlink To: Colin_Higbie References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.8) Subject: Re: [Starlink] =?utf-8?q?It=E2=80=99s_the_Latency=2C_FCC?= X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 19:51:21 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_CFF8F858-A311-4C5F-B5F8-33CEDAAEB867 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B0198725-506F-4576-9201-964D475C493C" --Apple-Mail=_B0198725-506F-4576-9201-964D475C493C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Colin, I am overwhelmed with all the reasons that prevent low(er) or consistent = latency. I think that our best ISP offerings should deliver graceful, agile, or = nimble service. Sure, handle all the high-volume data. The high-volume = service just shouldn=E2=80=99t preclude graceful service. Yes, the = current ISP practices fall short. Can we help them improve their = service? Am I asking too much? Gene ---------------------------------------------- Eugene Chang IEEE Life Senior Member > On Apr 30, 2024, at 9:31 AM, Colin_Higbie via Starlink = wrote: >=20 > Gene, >=20 > I think the lion's share of other people (many brilliant people here) = on this thread are focused on keeping latency down when under load. I = generally just read and don't contribute on those discussions, because = that's not my area of expertise. I only posted my point on bandwidth, = not to detract from the importance of reducing latency, but to correct = what I believed to be an important error on minimum bandwidth required = to be able to perform standard Internet functions. >=20 > To my surprise, there was pushback on the figure, so I've responded to = try to educate this group on streaming usage in the hope that the people = working on the latency problem under load (core reason for this group to = exist) can also be aware of the minimum bandwidth needs to ensure they = don't plan based on bad assumptions. >=20 > For a single user, minimum bandwidth (independent of latency) needs to = be at least 25Mbps assuming the goal is to provide access to all = standard Internet services. Anything short of that will deny users = access to the primary streaming services, and more specifically won't be = able to watch 4K HDR video, which is the market standard for streaming = services today and likely will remain at that level for the next several = years. >=20 > I think it's fine to offer lower-cost options that don't deliver 4K = HDR video (not everyone cares about that), but at least 25Mbps should be = available to an Internet customer for any new Internet service rollout. >=20 > Cheers, > Colin >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Starlink On Behalf Of = starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 3:05 PM > To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:04:43 -1000 > From: Eugene Y Chang > To: Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink > > Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC > Message-ID: <438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >=20 > I am always surprised how complicated these discussions become. = (Surprised mostly because I forgot the kind of issues this community = care about.) The discussion doesn=E2=80=99t shed light on the following = scenarios. >=20 > While watching stream content, activating controls needed to switch = content sometimes (often?) have long pauses. I attribute that to buffer = bloat and high latency. >=20 > 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.) >=20 > How can we deliver graceful performance to both persons in a = household? > Is seeking graceful performance too complicated to improve? > (I said =E2=80=9Cgraceful=E2=80=9D to allow technical flexibility.) >=20 > Gene > ---------------------------------------------- > Eugene Chang >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink --Apple-Mail=_B0198725-506F-4576-9201-964D475C493C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Colin,
I am overwhelmed with all the reasons = that prevent low(er) or consistent latency.
I think = that our best ISP offerings should deliver graceful, agile, or nimble = service. Sure, handle all the high-volume data. The high-volume service = just shouldn=E2=80=99t preclude graceful service. Yes, the current ISP = practices fall short. Can we help them improve their service?

Am I asking too = much?

Gene
----------------------------------------------
Eugene Chang
IEEE Life Senior Member




On Apr 30, 2024, at 9:31 AM, Colin_Higbie via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

Gene,

I think the lion's share = of other people (many brilliant people here) on this thread are focused = on keeping latency down when under load. I generally just read and don't = contribute on those discussions, because that's not my area of = expertise. I only posted my point on bandwidth, not to detract from the = importance of reducing latency, but to correct what I believed to be an = important error on minimum bandwidth required to be able to perform = standard Internet functions.

To my = surprise, there was pushback on the figure, so I've responded to try to = educate this group on streaming usage in the hope that the people = working on the latency problem under load (core reason for this group to = exist) can also be aware of the minimum bandwidth needs to ensure they = don't plan based on bad assumptions.

For a = single user, minimum bandwidth (independent of latency) needs to be at = least 25Mbps assuming the goal is to provide access to all standard = Internet services. Anything short of that will deny users access to the = primary streaming services, and more specifically won't be able to watch = 4K HDR video, which is the market standard for streaming services today = and likely will remain at that level for the next several years.

I think it's fine to offer lower-cost options = that don't deliver 4K HDR video (not everyone cares about that), but at = least 25Mbps should be available to an Internet customer for any new = Internet service rollout.

Cheers,
Colin


-----Original= Message-----
From: Starlink <starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> On Behalf Of = starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net
Sent: = Tuesday, April 30, 2024 3:05 PM
To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: = Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15


---------------------------------------------------------------= -------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, = 30 Apr 2024 09:04:43 -1000
From: Eugene Y Chang <eugene.chang@ieee.org>
To: Colin_Higbie = <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>, Dave Taht via Starlink
= <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC
Message-ID: = <438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"

I am always surprised how complicated these discussions = become. (Surprised mostly because I forgot the kind of issues this = community care about.) The discussion doesn=E2=80=99t shed light on the = following scenarios.

While watching stream = content, activating controls needed to switch content sometimes (often?) = have long pauses. I attribute that to buffer bloat and high latency.

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.)

How can we deliver graceful performance to both persons in a = household?
Is seeking graceful performance too complicated = to improve?
(I said =E2=80=9Cgraceful=E2=80=9D to allow = technical flexibility.)

Gene
----------------------------------------------
Eugene Chang

_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink

= --Apple-Mail=_B0198725-506F-4576-9201-964D475C493C-- --Apple-Mail=_CFF8F858-A311-4C5F-B5F8-33CEDAAEB867 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEERPTGiBqcibajhTSsv0/8FiYdKmAFAmYxS7UACgkQv0/8FiYd KmCouQ/9EKCWu4Mfs9JWezXQ4o/L2qe8LZCXSQ4fNSHhua8uDw+l81Cb0qfa2knM Q+e4b7mZq/aZ0AMJnISGca5L/sAOOGnWky6pvAoceMlEd0k9X1S10PKW/GbqXgop E9JrfolSKDHWzC05OfkoumCY4KBlTgUn8jUPiy7t17oK+pO0mQw8Zoozj8IlIYMO jkktn88zlS4KlXcBPdCfWOjdw6toAIyU77E7d3CAKLpG+2SKxHajBd0y24qtGFkO 8UgF3dVHXXcTO3lgpwpfo/ItMhbOm5nv0WIb/XXtLFnlerDTHjdz2Lk2cI2Xs2Lt GBe0E88BBqz1wuAiR0Yt+kRZC9nyy+OOgyPPe4jWaHeVJLLBBrVvcZ/vSUPfQ8pO rC2DQM1MXBWBfQEGiKQiWQAUUrCPvpe/d5J/a4+HBuaEF7mQ9fVdFWLYGn4yBIt/ CER74eUT7xN+jjG+HnHK+zwQwbPh9m1fQsYNguLFfeTS0PxE7fBWyxswEJXi354z kkH/cMNxM7/8/J7/afdLm+6Zjkd5RvIqz2K27y/PitIxDQ6XqTPjssMnONdYci67 B6utBnb6E89DNh7ix3xAoGRVZR/UiZxiNCFQHtaEwMzuuDxbHgEoePUhl7eXGlix lePIcbA7JErHKtmBT2FaIOxH9fLKCCeUCzq8WoVt4iop3KBjnJg= =ae8Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_CFF8F858-A311-4C5F-B5F8-33CEDAAEB867--