From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (syn-045-059-245-186.biz.spectrum.com [45.59.245.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7445E3B29D for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 23:18:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dlang-mobile (unknown [10.2.2.53]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E46C1CF31A; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 20:18:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 20:18:34 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang To: Colin_Higbie cc: David Lang , "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1on0ppr4-os7r-7pp4-r802-65r795862p38@ynat.uz> References: <7n9n40q0-qn32-snpo-q968-q4o4o036pooq@ynat.uz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="228850167-345082642-1714533514=:111574" Subject: Re: [Starlink] =?utf-8?q?It=CA=BCs_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: Wed, 01 May 2024 03:18:35 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --228850167-345082642-1714533514=:111574 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Wed, 1 May 2024, Colin_Higbie wrote: > This is a largely black and white issue: there are a significant # of users > who need 4K streaming support. Period. This is a market standard, like 91 > octane gas, 802.11ax Wi-Fi, skim (0%) milk, 50 SPF sunblock, and 5G phones. > The fact that not everyone uses one of those market-established standards does > not mean that each is not an important standard with a sizable market cohort > that merits support. 25Mbps for 4K HDR streaming is one such standard. That's > not my opinion. That's a market-established fact and the only reason I posted > here – to ensure this group has that information so that you can be more > effective in presenting your latency arguments and solutions to the ISPs. But just because many people want those things doesn't mean that 87 octane gas, SPF 20 sunblock, 2% milk, 4G phones, etc should be eliminated. I in no way advocate for the elimination of 25Mb connectivity. What I am arguing against is defining that as the minimum acceptable connectivity. i.e. pretending that anything less than that may as well not exist (ot at the very least should not be defined as 'broadband') David Lang --228850167-345082642-1714533514=:111574--