Re: [Starlink] It’s the Latency, FCC

Dave Taht
2024-04-30T21:08:04Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4923 bytes --]

Just fq codel or cake everything and you get all that.

Libreqos is free software for those that do not want to update their data
plane. Perhaps we should do a public demo of what it can do for every tech
on the planet. Dsl benefits, fiber does also (but it is the stats that
matter more on fiber because the customer wifi becomes bloated)

Starlink merely fq codeled their wifi and did some aqm work (not codel I
think) to get the amazing results they are getting today. I don't have the
waveform test results handy but they are amazing. I feel a sea change in
the wind...

On Tue, Apr 30, 2024, 12:51 PM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink <
starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> 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’t 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’s the Latency, FCC
> Message-ID: <438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="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’t 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 “graceful” to allow technical flexibility.)
>
> Gene
> ----------------------------------------------
> Eugene Chang
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8510 bytes --]