From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (unknown [66.167.227.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 959BC3B2A4 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 15:37:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dlang-mobile (unknown [10.2.2.69]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id C64431AC5A2; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:37:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:37:55 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang To: Dave Taht cc: Dave Taht via Starlink In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <23p3762o-798o-rs8q-686r-s05nr7o6s826@ynat.uz> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY=0000000000001d160406056d8b14 Subject: Re: [Starlink] impressed with my starlink today 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: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 19:37:56 -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. --0000000000001d160406056d8b14 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT I work remotely and routinely use Starlink for video calls while doing other uploads/downloads. As do several others at my company. Some of us are in rural areas, I'm in Southern California, but in a place that doesn't have fiber available (predicted to arrive at my address sometime next year) Starlink occasionally has hiccups, but not significantly more so than other people's network connections. David Lang On Fri, 15 Sep 2023, Dave Taht via Starlink wrote: > I just did a bunch of videoconferences all morning without many glitches. > (2 hours, only one download glitch, not recording so I do not know how good > the up was) Admittedly, I was > using galene.org rather than zoom, but I did do a couple up and downloads > while talking and they seemed to work pretty well. > > I ran a few tests afterwards, to observe my overall bandwidth up was way > up, and tcp congestion controls pretty smoothly adapting to physical > changes in RTT and bandwidth for a change. I sat there and admired the > T+120 smoothnesss in this transition, in particular. > > Anyone else seeing progress in long term behaviors? I think in part it was > just galene doing better, or perhaps it was because my baseline bandwidth > stayed above galene´s base. > > > --0000000000001d160406056d8b14--