From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com (mail-pl1-x62d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) (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 E6FCB3B29D for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:05:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1e4f341330fso56470505ad.0 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:05:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ieee.org; s=google; t=1714503923; x=1715108723; 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=VT0BT6fuXuZL/2vfKG4koCQ7aTeEiDyTtKHkJlYH04Q=; b=Lui3/VJt1aZ9EMa7GYAvakFL5D6+6cvaeb+6OcbVXreQJWdoGF/I1HWcFbD+yZPLSX T5YnSHEKmyVjg6x1qWu2wsJ26XSCBen3k9OwV7UDY+67lp3EOQxG2Um3DFqssuZZRI0T mCyTNlIN4fsmmoCxuO6SoTH4Oob9FacK9C7o0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1714503923; x=1715108723; 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=VT0BT6fuXuZL/2vfKG4koCQ7aTeEiDyTtKHkJlYH04Q=; b=D/J7sr15CoEZamKM1MyoU7VjyXPp6++YrBCsGRDeWqLC08Dcp/Z6+Wr0HxCLSc4w4h xuDf9oEvEMerX96cCft6wKPyJI8zAox1xtlhF3bAbSR8RWwpocX8S7SLkSlqg/6xzXKt W0/RVlYKeJxYiPasavLDsxzdDiFtq77cq7GBdp8ryTo7abzfOmeQn25RCKVZ1jk4GDp/ R1GLqHyw7jI4Wy+odLyk1qBwdA8q+ktv+pcdqx6eiHPqlzO+Ri7hgfCncJ+E9C/4ZfUs 4e6WKGHOdRB8wAT8RglfoD2+R0OiBdb33uQ+nm8clN9Y5XMeU72XPRHsRBbr21rzul1+ zOVg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUKPo9riEgQW4x5ZDVR0UyMMZDkbiqWBRPI7493CVhgSz/JCae2p2QkcvJChKHBj77EPdX5CFggfE+fWhlH8VG+GPILtdlqXmnugLfY5bQ= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyhsZH1tG77mnwL4vsaHr/LCbxuduGgWPNqvtiroVjMFklu89om KYjGlpJ21KFUnUhEOzYn3lmXDLD/zxLJmq7C/IhUJtRcqQ25ZJ2hUj7A0PJLvw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHKZf1Y/E46/jMJenhp2EzLl3tq7aaNCyysQ1deYn+I8YtF5SsNMpzS5OPfoAd/hscv5Gzbzg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e80b:b0:1dd:c288:899f with SMTP id u11-20020a170902e80b00b001ddc288899fmr327551plg.18.1714503922179; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (dhcp-72-253-194-45.hawaiiantel.net. [72.253.194.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l11-20020a170902d04b00b001ec53dedd06sm1507929pll.79.2024.04.30.12.04.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:05:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Eugene Y Chang Message-Id: <438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7D08ED70-8D0B-4F4F-A86F-E7526D776EF9"; 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 09:04:43 -1000 In-Reply-To: To: Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink 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 19:05:24 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7D08ED70-8D0B-4F4F-A86F-E7526D776EF9 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E0F55299-466E-4316-A888-17433480F04B" --Apple-Mail=_E0F55299-466E-4316-A888-17433480F04B Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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=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 > On Apr 30, 2024, at 8:05 AM, Colin_Higbie via Starlink = wrote: >=20 > [SM] How that? Capacity and latency are largely independent... think a = semi truck full of harddisks from NYC to LA has decent = capacity/'bandwidth' but lousy latency... >=20 >=20 > Sebastian, nothing but agreement with you that capacity and latency = are largely independent (my old dial-up modem connections 25 years ago = at ~50kbps had much lower latencies than my original geostationary = satellite connections with higher bandwidth). I also agree that both are = important in their own ways. I had originally responded (this thread = seems to have come back to life from a few months ago) to a point about = 10Mbps capacity being sufficient, and that as long as a user has a = 10Mbps connection, latency improvements would provide more benefit to = most users at that point than further bandwidth increases. I responded = that the minimum "sufficient" metric should be higher than 10Mpbs, = probably at 25Mbps to support 4K HDR, which is the streaming standard = today and likely will be for the foreseeable future. >=20 > I have not seen any responses that provided a sound argument against = that conclusion. A lot of responses like "but 8K is coming" (it's not, = only experimental YouTube videos showcase these resolutions to the = general public, no studio is making 8K content and no streaming service = offers anything in 8K or higher) and "I don't need to watch 4K, 1080p is = sufficient for me, so it should be for everyone else too" (personal = preference should never be a substitute for market data). Neither of = those arguments refutes objective industry standards: 25Mbps is the = minimum required bandwidth for multiple of the biggest streaming = services. >=20 > None of this intends to suggest that we should ease off pressure on = ISPs to provide low latency connections that don't falter under load. = Just want to be sure we all recognize that the floor bandwidth should be = set no lower than 25Mbps. >=20 > However, I would say that depending on usage, for a typical family = use, where 25Mbps is "sufficient" for any single stream, even 50ms = latency (not great, but much better than a system will have with bad = bufferbloat problems that can easily fall to the hundreds of = milliseconds) is also "sufficient" for all but specialized applications = or competitive gaming. I would also say that if you already have latency = at or below 20ms, further gains on latency will be imperceptible to = almost all users, where bandwidth increases will at least allow for more = simultaneous connections, even if any given stream doesn't really = benefit much beyond about 25Mbps. >=20 > I would also say that for working remotely, for those of us who work = with large audio or video files, the ability to transfer multi-hundred = MB files from a 1Gbps connection in several seconds instead of several = minutes for a 25Mbps connection is a meaningful boost to work = effectiveness and productivity, where a latency reduction from 50ms to = 10ms wouldn't really yield any material changes to our work. >=20 > Is 100Mbps and 10ms latency better than 25Mbps and 50ms latency? Of = course. Moving to ever more capacity and lower latencies is a good thing = on both fronts, but where hardware and engineering costs tend to scale = non-linearly as you start pushing against current limits, "sufficiency" = is an important metric to keep in mind. Cost matters. >=20 > Cheers, > Colin >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Starlink On Behalf Of = starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 10:41 AM > To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 11 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:32:51 +0200 > From: Sebastian Moeller > To: Alexandre Petrescu > Cc: Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink > Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8 >=20 > Hi Alexandre, >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On 30. Apr 2024, at 16:25, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink = wrote: >>=20 >> Colin, >> 8K usefulness over 4K: the higher the resolution the more it will be = possible to zoom in into paused images. It is one of the advantages. = People dont do that a lot these days but why not in the future. >=20 > [SM] Because that is how in the past we envisioned the future, see = here h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DhHwjceFcF2Q 'enhance'... >=20 >> Spotify lower quality than CD and still usable: one would check not = Spotify, but other services for audiophiles; some of these use 'DSD' = formats which go way beyond the so called high-def audio of 384khz = sampling freqs. They dont 'stream' but download. It is these = higher-than-384khz sampling rates equivalent (e.g. DSD1024 is the = equivalent of, I think of something like 10 times CD quality, I think). = If Spotify is the king of streamers, in the future other companies might = become the kings of something else than 'streaming', a name yet to be = invented. >> For each of them, it is true, normal use will not expose any more = advantage than the previous version (no advantage of 8K over 4K, no = advantage of 88KHz DVD audio over CD, etc) - yet the progress is ongoing = on and on, and nobody comes back to CD or to DVD audio or to SD = (standard definition video). >> Finally, 8K and DSD per se are requirements of just bandwidth. The = need of latency should be exposed there, and that is not = straightforward. But higher bandwidths will come with lower latencies = anyways. >=20 > [SM] How that? Capacity and latency are largely independent... think a = semi truck full of harddisks from NYC to LA has decent = capacity/'bandwidth' but lousy latency... >=20 >=20 >> The quest of latency requirements might be, in fact, a quest to see = how one could use that low latency technology that is possible and = available anyways. >> Alex >> Le 30/04/2024 =C3=A0 16:00, Colin_Higbie via Starlink a =C3=A9crit : >>> David Fern=C3=A1ndez, those bitrates are safe numbers, but many = streams could get by with less at those resolutions. H.265 compression = is at a variable bit rate with simpler scenes requiring less bandwidth. = Note that 4K with HDR (30 bits per pixel rather than 24) consistently = also fits within 25Mbps. >>>=20 >>> David Lang, HDR is a requirement for 4K programming. That is not to = say that all 4K streams are in HDR, but in setting a required bandwidth, = because 4K signals can include HDR, the required bandwidth must = accommodate and allow for HDR. That said, I believe all modern 4K = programming on Netflix and Amazon Prime is HDR. Note David Fern=C3=A1ndez'= point that Spain independently reached the same conclusion as the US = streaming services of 25Mbps requirement for 4K. >>>=20 >>> Visually, to a person watching and assuming an OLED (or microLED) = display capable of showing the full color and contrast gamut of HDR (LCD = can't really do it justice, even with miniLED backlighting), the move to = HDR from SDR is more meaningful in most situations than the move from = 1080p to 4K. I don't believe going to further resolutions, scenes beyond = 4K (e.g., 8K), will add anything meaningful to a movie or television = viewer over 4K. Video games could benefit from the added resolution, but = lens aberration in cameras along with focal length and limited depth of = field render blurriness of even a sharp picture greater than the pixel = size in most scenes beyond about 4K - 5.5K. Video games don=E2=80=99t = suffer this problem because those scenes are rendered, eliminating = problems from camera lenses. So video games may still benefit from 8K = resolution, but streaming programming won=E2=80=99t. >>>=20 >>> There is precedent for this in the audio streaming world: audio = streaming bitrates have retracted from prior peaks. Even though 48kHz = and higher bitrate audio available on DVD is superior to the audio = quality of 44.1kHz CDs, Spotify and Apple and most other streaming = services stream music at LOWER quality than CD. It=E2=80=99s good enough = for most people to not notice the difference. I don=E2=80=99t see much = push in the foreseeable future for programming beyond UHD (4K + HDR). = That=E2=80=99s not to say never, but there=E2=80=99s no real benefit to = it with current camera tech and screen sizes. >>>=20 >>> Conclusion: for video streaming needs over the next decade or so, = 25Mbps should be appropriate. As David Fern=C3=A1ndez rightly points = out, H.266 and other future protocols will improve compression = capabilities and reduce bandwidth needs at any given resolution and = color bit depth, adding a bit more headroom for small improvements. >>>=20 >>> Cheers, >>> Colin >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Starlink On Behalf Of >>> starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 9:31 AM >>> To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:54:20 +0200 >>> From: David Fern=C3=A1ndez >>> To: starlink >>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC >>> Message-ID: >>> = >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >>>=20 >>> Last February, TV broadcasting in Spain left behind SD definitively = and moved to HD as standard quality, also starting to regularly = broadcast a channel with 4K quality. >>>=20 >>> A 4K video (2160p) at 30 frames per second, handled with the HEVC = compression codec (H.265), and using 24 bits per pixel, requires 25 = Mbit/s. >>>=20 >>> Full HD video (1080p) requires 10 Mbit/s. >>>=20 >>> For lots of 4K video encoded at < 20 Mbit/s, it may be hard to = distinguish it visually from the HD version of the same video (this was = also confirmed by SBTVD Forum Tests). >>>=20 >>> Then, 8K will come, eventually, requiring a minimum of ~32 Mbit/s: >>> = https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-taking-sh >>> ape-in-europe >>>=20 >>> The latest codec VVC (H.266) may reduce the required data rates by = at least 27%, at the expense of more computing power required, but = somehow it is claimed it will be more energy efficient. >>> = https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8k-broa >>> dcast-and-broadband-television >>>=20 >>> Regards, >>>=20 >>> David >>>=20 >>> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 19:16:27 -0700 (PDT) >>> From: David Lang >>> To: Colin_Higbie >>> Cc: David Lang , "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" >>> >>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"; Format=3D"flowed" >>>=20 >>> Amazon, youtube set explicitly to 4k (I didn't say HDR) >>>=20 >>> David Lang >>>=20 >>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Colin_Higbie wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 01:30:21 +0000 >>>> From: Colin_Higbie >>>> To: David Lang >>>> Cc: "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" >>>> >>>> Subject: RE: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC >>>>=20 >>>> Was that 4K HDR (not SDR) using the standard protocols that >>>> streaming >>>>=20 >>> services use (Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, etc.) or was it just = some YouTube 4K SDR videos? YouTube will show "HDR" on the gear icon for = content that's 4K HDR. If it only shows "4K" instead of "HDR," then = means it's SDR. >>> Note that if YouTube, if left to the default of Auto for streaming = resolution it will also automatically drop the quality to something that = fits within the bandwidth and most of the "4K" content on YouTube is = low-quality and not true UHD content (even beyond missing HDR). For = example, many smartphones will record 4K video, but their optics are not = sufficient to actually have distinct per-pixel image detail, meaning it = compresses down to a smaller image with no real additional loss in = picture quality, but only because it's really a 4K UHD stream to begin = with. >>>=20 >>>> Note that 4K video compression codecs are lossy, so the lower >>>> quality the >>>>=20 >>> initial image, the lower the bandwidth needed to convey the stream = w/o additional quality loss. The needed bandwidth also changes with = scene complexity. Falling confetti, like on Newy Year's Eve or at the = Super Bowl make for one of the most demanding scenes. Lots of detailed = fire and explosions with fast-moving fast panning full dynamic = backgrounds are also tough for a compressed signal to preserve (but not = as hard as a screen full of falling confetti). >>>=20 >>>> I'm dubious that 8Mbps can handle that except for some of the >>>> simplest >>>>=20 >>> video, like cartoons or fairly static scenes like the news. Those = scenes don't require much data, but that's not the case for all 4K HDR = scenes by any means. >>>=20 >>>> It's obviously in Netflix and the other streaming services' = interest >>>> to >>>>=20 >>> be able to sell their more expensive 4K HDR service to as many = people as possible. There's a reason they won't offer it to anyone with = less than 25Mbps =E2=80=93 they don't want the complaints and service = calls. Now, to be fair, 4K HDR definitely doesn=E2=80=99t typically = require 25Mbps, but it's to their credit that they do include a small = bandwidth buffer. In my experience monitoring bandwidth usage for 4K HDR = streaming, 15Mbps is the minimum if doing nothing else and that will = frequently fall short, depending on the 4K HDR content. >>>=20 >>>> Cheers, >>>> Colin >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: David Lang >>>> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2024 8:40 PM >>>> To: Colin Higbie >>>> Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC >>>>=20 >>>> hmm, before my DSL got disconnected (the carrier decided they = didn't >>>> want >>>>=20 >>> to support it any more), I could stream 4k at 8Mb down if there >>> wasn't too much other activity on the network (doing so at 2x speed >>> was a problem) >>>=20 >>>> David Lang >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Fri, 15 Mar 2024, Colin Higbie via Starlink wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 18:32:36 +0000 >>>>> From: Colin Higbie via Starlink >>>>> Reply-To: Colin Higbie >>>>> To: "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" >>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>> I have now been trying to break the common conflation that >>>>>> download >>>>>>=20 >>> "speed" >>>=20 >>>>>> means anything at all for day to day, minute to minute, second to >>>>>> second, use, once you crack 10mbit, now, for over 14 years. Am I >>>>>> succeeding? I lost the 25/10 battle, and keep pointing at really >>>>>> terrible latency under load and wifi weirdnesses for many = existing >>>>>>=20 >>> 100/20 services today. >>>=20 >>>>> While I completely agree that latency has bigger impact on how >>>>>=20 >>> responsive the Internet feels to use, I do think that 10Mbit is too = low for some standard applications regardless of latency: with the more = recent availability of 4K and higher streaming, that does require a = higher minimum bandwidth to work at all. One could argue that no one = NEEDS 4K streaming, but many families would view this as an important = part of what they do with their Internet (Starlink makes this reliably = possible at our farmhouse). 4K HDR-supporting TV's are among the most = popular TVs being purchased in the U.S. today. Netflix, Amazon, Max, = Disney and other streaming services provide a substantial portion of 4K = HDR content. >>>=20 >>>>> So, I agree that 25/10 is sufficient, for up to 4k HDR streaming. >>>>> 100/20 >>>>>=20 >>> would provide plenty of bandwidth for multiple concurrent 4K users = or a 1-2 8K streams. >>>=20 >>>>> For me, not claiming any special expertise on market needs, just = my >>>>> own >>>>>=20 >>> personal assessment on what typical families will need and care = about: >>>=20 >>>>> Latency: below 50ms under load always feels good except for some >>>>> intensive gaming (I don't see any benefit to getting loaded = latency >>>>> further below ~20ms for typical applications, with an exception = for >>>>> cloud-based gaming that benefits with lower latency all the way >>>>> down to about 5ms for young, really fast players, the rest of us >>>>> won't be able to tell the difference) >>>>>=20 >>>>> Download Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough if not doing UHD video >>>>> streaming >>>>>=20 >>>>> Download Bandwidth: 25 - 100Mbps if doing UHD video streaming, >>>>> depending on # of streams or if wanting to be ready for 8k >>>>>=20 >>>>> Upload Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough for quality video >>>>> conferencing, higher only needed for multiple concurrent outbound >>>>> streams >>>>>=20 >>>>> So, for example (and ignoring upload for this), I would rather = have >>>>>=20 >>> latency at 50ms (under load) and DL bandwidth of 25Mbps than latency = of 1ms with a max bandwidth of 10Mbps, because the super-low latency = doesn't solve the problem with insufficient bandwidth to watch 4K HDR = content. But, I'd also rather have latency of 20ms with 100Mbps DL, then = latency that exceeds 100ms under load with 1Gbps DL bandwidth. I think = the important thing is to reach "good enough" on both, not just excel at = one while falling short of "good enough" on the other. >>>=20 >>>>> Note that Starlink handles all of this well, including kids >>>>> watching >>>>>=20 >>> YouTube while my wife and I watch 4K UHD Netflix, except the upload = speed occasionally tops at under 3Mbps for me, causing quality = degradation for outbound video calls (or used to, it seems to have = gotten better in recent months =E2=80=93 no problems since sometime in = 2023). >>>=20 >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Colin >>>>>=20 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Starlink mailing list >>>>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was >>> scrubbed... >>> URL: >>> = >> 0/5572b78b/attachment-0001.html> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Starlink mailing list >>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >>>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:40:58 +0200 > From: Alexandre Petrescu > To: Sebastian Moeller > Cc: Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink > Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC > Message-ID: <727b07d9-9dc3-43b7-8e17-50b6b7a4444a@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUTF-8; format=3Dflowed >=20 >=20 > Le 30/04/2024 =C3=A0 16:32, Sebastian Moeller a =C3=A9crit : >> Hi Alexandre, >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> On 30. Apr 2024, at 16:25, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Colin, >>> 8K usefulness over 4K: the higher the resolution the more it will be = possible to zoom in into paused images. It is one of the advantages. = People dont do that a lot these days but why not in the future. >> [SM] Because that is how in the past we envisioned the future, see = here h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DhHwjceFcF2Q 'enhance'... >>=20 >>> Spotify lower quality than CD and still usable: one would check not = Spotify, but other services for audiophiles; some of these use 'DSD' = formats which go way beyond the so called high-def audio of 384khz = sampling freqs. They dont 'stream' but download. It is these = higher-than-384khz sampling rates equivalent (e.g. DSD1024 is the = equivalent of, I think of something like 10 times CD quality, I think). = If Spotify is the king of streamers, in the future other companies might = become the kings of something else than 'streaming', a name yet to be = invented. >>> For each of them, it is true, normal use will not expose any more = advantage than the previous version (no advantage of 8K over 4K, no = advantage of 88KHz DVD audio over CD, etc) - yet the progress is ongoing = on and on, and nobody comes back to CD or to DVD audio or to SD = (standard definition video). >>> Finally, 8K and DSD per se are requirements of just bandwidth. The = need of latency should be exposed there, and that is not = straightforward. But higher bandwidths will come with lower latencies = anyways. >> [SM] How that? Capacity and latency are largely independent... think = a semi truck full of harddisks from NYC to LA has decent = capacity/'bandwidth' but lousy latency... >=20 > I agree with you: two distinct parameters, bandwidth and latency. But = they evolve simultenously, relatively bound by a constant relationship. = For any particular link technology (satcom is one) the bandwidth and = latency are in a constant relationship. One grows, the other = diminishes. There are exceptions too, in some details. >=20 > (as for the truck full of harddisks, and jumbo jets full of DVDs - = they are just concepts: striking good examples of how enormous = bandwidths are possible, but still to see in practice; physicsts also = talked about a train transported by a train transported by a train and = so on, to overcome the speed of light: another striking example, but not = in practice). >=20 > Alex >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> The quest of latency requirements might be, in fact, a quest to see = how one could use that low latency technology that is possible and = available anyways. >>> Alex >>> Le 30/04/2024 =C3=A0 16:00, Colin_Higbie via Starlink a =C3=A9crit : >>>> David Fern=C3=A1ndez, those bitrates are safe numbers, but many = streams could get by with less at those resolutions. H.265 compression = is at a variable bit rate with simpler scenes requiring less bandwidth. = Note that 4K with HDR (30 bits per pixel rather than 24) consistently = also fits within 25Mbps. >>>>=20 >>>> David Lang, HDR is a requirement for 4K programming. That is not to = say that all 4K streams are in HDR, but in setting a required bandwidth, = because 4K signals can include HDR, the required bandwidth must = accommodate and allow for HDR. That said, I believe all modern 4K = programming on Netflix and Amazon Prime is HDR. Note David Fern=C3=A1ndez'= point that Spain independently reached the same conclusion as the US = streaming services of 25Mbps requirement for 4K. >>>>=20 >>>> Visually, to a person watching and assuming an OLED (or microLED) = display capable of showing the full color and contrast gamut of HDR (LCD = can't really do it justice, even with miniLED backlighting), the move to = HDR from SDR is more meaningful in most situations than the move from = 1080p to 4K. I don't believe going to further resolutions, scenes beyond = 4K (e.g., 8K), will add anything meaningful to a movie or television = viewer over 4K. Video games could benefit from the added resolution, but = lens aberration in cameras along with focal length and limited depth of = field render blurriness of even a sharp picture greater than the pixel = size in most scenes beyond about 4K - 5.5K. Video games don=E2=80=99t = suffer this problem because those scenes are rendered, eliminating = problems from camera lenses. So video games may still benefit from 8K = resolution, but streaming programming won=E2=80=99t. >>>>=20 >>>> There is precedent for this in the audio streaming world: audio = streaming bitrates have retracted from prior peaks. Even though 48kHz = and higher bitrate audio available on DVD is superior to the audio = quality of 44.1kHz CDs, Spotify and Apple and most other streaming = services stream music at LOWER quality than CD. It=E2=80=99s good enough = for most people to not notice the difference. I don=E2=80=99t see much = push in the foreseeable future for programming beyond UHD (4K + HDR). = That=E2=80=99s not to say never, but there=E2=80=99s no real benefit to = it with current camera tech and screen sizes. >>>>=20 >>>> Conclusion: for video streaming needs over the next decade or so, = 25Mbps should be appropriate. As David Fern=C3=A1ndez rightly points = out, H.266 and other future protocols will improve compression = capabilities and reduce bandwidth needs at any given resolution and = color bit depth, adding a bit more headroom for small improvements. >>>>=20 >>>> Cheers, >>>> Colin >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Starlink On Behalf = Of >>>> starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 9:31 AM >>>> To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>> Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Message: 2 >>>> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:54:20 +0200 >>>> From: David Fern=C3=A1ndez >>>> To: starlink >>>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC >>>> Message-ID: >>>> = >>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >>>>=20 >>>> Last February, TV broadcasting in Spain left behind SD definitively = and moved to HD as standard quality, also starting to regularly = broadcast a channel with 4K quality. >>>>=20 >>>> A 4K video (2160p) at 30 frames per second, handled with the HEVC = compression codec (H.265), and using 24 bits per pixel, requires 25 = Mbit/s. >>>>=20 >>>> Full HD video (1080p) requires 10 Mbit/s. >>>>=20 >>>> For lots of 4K video encoded at < 20 Mbit/s, it may be hard to = distinguish it visually from the HD version of the same video (this was = also confirmed by SBTVD Forum Tests). >>>>=20 >>>> Then, 8K will come, eventually, requiring a minimum of ~32 Mbit/s: >>>> = https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-taking-s >>>> hape-in-europe >>>>=20 >>>> The latest codec VVC (H.266) may reduce the required data rates by = at least 27%, at the expense of more computing power required, but = somehow it is claimed it will be more energy efficient. >>>> = https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8k-bro >>>> adcast-and-broadband-television >>>>=20 >>>> Regards, >>>>=20 >>>> David >>>>=20 >>>> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 19:16:27 -0700 (PDT) >>>> From: David Lang >>>> To: Colin_Higbie >>>> Cc: David Lang , "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" >>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC >>>> Message-ID: >>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"; Format=3D"flowed" >>>>=20 >>>> Amazon, youtube set explicitly to 4k (I didn't say HDR) >>>>=20 >>>> David Lang >>>>=20 >>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Colin_Higbie wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 01:30:21 +0000 >>>>> From: Colin_Higbie >>>>> To: David Lang >>>>> Cc: "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" >>>>> >>>>> Subject: RE: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC >>>>>=20 >>>>> Was that 4K HDR (not SDR) using the standard protocols that >>>>> streaming >>>>>=20 >>>> services use (Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, etc.) or was it just = some YouTube 4K SDR videos? YouTube will show "HDR" on the gear icon for = content that's 4K HDR. If it only shows "4K" instead of "HDR," then = means it's SDR. >>>> Note that if YouTube, if left to the default of Auto for streaming = resolution it will also automatically drop the quality to something that = fits within the bandwidth and most of the "4K" content on YouTube is = low-quality and not true UHD content (even beyond missing HDR). For = example, many smartphones will record 4K video, but their optics are not = sufficient to actually have distinct per-pixel image detail, meaning it = compresses down to a smaller image with no real additional loss in = picture quality, but only because it's really a 4K UHD stream to begin = with. >>>>=20 >>>>> Note that 4K video compression codecs are lossy, so the lower >>>>> quality the >>>>>=20 >>>> initial image, the lower the bandwidth needed to convey the stream = w/o additional quality loss. The needed bandwidth also changes with = scene complexity. Falling confetti, like on Newy Year's Eve or at the = Super Bowl make for one of the most demanding scenes. Lots of detailed = fire and explosions with fast-moving fast panning full dynamic = backgrounds are also tough for a compressed signal to preserve (but not = as hard as a screen full of falling confetti). >>>>=20 >>>>> I'm dubious that 8Mbps can handle that except for some of the >>>>> simplest >>>>>=20 >>>> video, like cartoons or fairly static scenes like the news. Those = scenes don't require much data, but that's not the case for all 4K HDR = scenes by any means. >>>>=20 >>>>> It's obviously in Netflix and the other streaming services' >>>>> interest to >>>>>=20 >>>> be able to sell their more expensive 4K HDR service to as many = people as possible. There's a reason they won't offer it to anyone with = less than 25Mbps =E2=80=93 they don't want the complaints and service = calls. Now, to be fair, 4K HDR definitely doesn=E2=80=99t typically = require 25Mbps, but it's to their credit that they do include a small = bandwidth buffer. In my experience monitoring bandwidth usage for 4K HDR = streaming, 15Mbps is the minimum if doing nothing else and that will = frequently fall short, depending on the 4K HDR content. >>>>=20 >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Colin >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: David Lang >>>>> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2024 8:40 PM >>>>> To: Colin Higbie >>>>> Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC >>>>>=20 >>>>> hmm, before my DSL got disconnected (the carrier decided they >>>>> didn't want >>>>>=20 >>>> to support it any more), I could stream 4k at 8Mb down if there >>>> wasn't too much other activity on the network (doing so at 2x speed >>>> was a problem) >>>>=20 >>>>> David Lang >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Fri, 15 Mar 2024, Colin Higbie via Starlink wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 18:32:36 +0000 >>>>>> From: Colin Higbie via Starlink >>>>>> Reply-To: Colin Higbie >>>>>> To: "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" >>>>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I have now been trying to break the common conflation that >>>>>>> download >>>>>>>=20 >>>> "speed" >>>>=20 >>>>>>> means anything at all for day to day, minute to minute, second = to >>>>>>> second, use, once you crack 10mbit, now, for over 14 years. Am I >>>>>>> succeeding? I lost the 25/10 battle, and keep pointing at really >>>>>>> terrible latency under load and wifi weirdnesses for many >>>>>>> existing >>>>>>>=20 >>>> 100/20 services today. >>>>=20 >>>>>> While I completely agree that latency has bigger impact on how >>>>>>=20 >>>> responsive the Internet feels to use, I do think that 10Mbit is too = low for some standard applications regardless of latency: with the more = recent availability of 4K and higher streaming, that does require a = higher minimum bandwidth to work at all. One could argue that no one = NEEDS 4K streaming, but many families would view this as an important = part of what they do with their Internet (Starlink makes this reliably = possible at our farmhouse). 4K HDR-supporting TV's are among the most = popular TVs being purchased in the U.S. today. Netflix, Amazon, Max, = Disney and other streaming services provide a substantial portion of 4K = HDR content. >>>>=20 >>>>>> So, I agree that 25/10 is sufficient, for up to 4k HDR streaming. >>>>>> 100/20 >>>>>>=20 >>>> would provide plenty of bandwidth for multiple concurrent 4K users = or a 1-2 8K streams. >>>>=20 >>>>>> For me, not claiming any special expertise on market needs, just >>>>>> my own >>>>>>=20 >>>> personal assessment on what typical families will need and care = about: >>>>=20 >>>>>> Latency: below 50ms under load always feels good except for some >>>>>> intensive gaming (I don't see any benefit to getting loaded >>>>>> latency further below ~20ms for typical applications, with an >>>>>> exception for cloud-based gaming that benefits with lower latency >>>>>> all the way down to about 5ms for young, really fast players, the >>>>>> rest of us won't be able to tell the difference) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Download Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough if not doing UHD video >>>>>> streaming >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Download Bandwidth: 25 - 100Mbps if doing UHD video streaming, >>>>>> depending on # of streams or if wanting to be ready for 8k >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Upload Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough for quality video >>>>>> conferencing, higher only needed for multiple concurrent outbound >>>>>> streams >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> So, for example (and ignoring upload for this), I would rather >>>>>> have >>>>>>=20 >>>> latency at 50ms (under load) and DL bandwidth of 25Mbps than = latency of 1ms with a max bandwidth of 10Mbps, because the super-low = latency doesn't solve the problem with insufficient bandwidth to watch = 4K HDR content. But, I'd also rather have latency of 20ms with 100Mbps = DL, then latency that exceeds 100ms under load with 1Gbps DL bandwidth. = I think the important thing is to reach "good enough" on both, not just = excel at one while falling short of "good enough" on the other. >>>>=20 >>>>>> Note that Starlink handles all of this well, including kids >>>>>> watching >>>>>>=20 >>>> YouTube while my wife and I watch 4K UHD Netflix, except the upload = speed occasionally tops at under 3Mbps for me, causing quality = degradation for outbound video calls (or used to, it seems to have = gotten better in recent months =E2=80=93 no problems since sometime in = 2023). >>>>=20 >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Colin >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Starlink mailing list >>>>>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >>>>>>=20 >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was >>>> scrubbed... >>>> URL: >>>> = >>> 30/5572b78b/attachment-0001.html> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Starlink mailing list >>>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >>>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Starlink mailing list >>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Subject: Digest Footer >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > End of Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 11 > **************************************** > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink --Apple-Mail=_E0F55299-466E-4316-A888-17433480F04B Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; 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=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


On Apr 30, 2024, at 8:05 AM, Colin_Higbie via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

[SM] = How that? Capacity and latency are largely independent... think a semi = truck full of harddisks from NYC to LA has decent capacity/'bandwidth' = but lousy latency...


Sebastian, nothing but agreement with you that capacity and = latency are largely independent (my old dial-up modem connections 25 = years ago at ~50kbps had much lower latencies than my original = geostationary satellite connections with higher bandwidth). I also agree = that both are important in their own ways. I had originally responded = (this thread seems to have come back to life from a few months ago) to a = point about 10Mbps capacity being sufficient, and that as long as a user = has a 10Mbps connection, latency improvements would provide more benefit = to most users at that point than further bandwidth increases. I = responded that the minimum "sufficient" metric should be higher than = 10Mpbs, probably at 25Mbps to support 4K HDR, which is the streaming = standard today and likely will be for the foreseeable future.

I have not seen any responses that provided a = sound argument against that conclusion. A lot of responses like "but 8K = is coming" (it's not, only experimental YouTube videos showcase these = resolutions to the general public, no studio is making 8K content and no = streaming service offers anything in 8K or higher) and "I don't need to = watch 4K, 1080p is sufficient for me, so it should be for everyone else = too" (personal preference should never be a substitute for market data). = Neither of those arguments refutes objective industry standards: 25Mbps = is the minimum required bandwidth for multiple of the biggest streaming = services.

None of this intends to suggest = that we should ease off pressure on ISPs to provide low latency = connections that don't falter under load. Just want to be sure we all = recognize that the floor bandwidth should be set no lower than 25Mbps. =

However, I would say that depending on = usage, for a typical family use, where 25Mbps is "sufficient" for any = single stream, even 50ms latency (not great, but much better than a = system will have with bad bufferbloat problems that can easily fall to = the hundreds of milliseconds) is also "sufficient" for all but = specialized applications or competitive gaming. I would also say that if = you already have latency at or below 20ms, further gains on latency will = be imperceptible to almost all users, where bandwidth increases will at = least allow for more simultaneous connections, even if any given stream = doesn't really benefit much beyond about 25Mbps.

I would also say that for working remotely, for those of us = who work with large audio or video files, the ability to transfer = multi-hundred MB files from a 1Gbps connection in several seconds = instead of several minutes for a 25Mbps connection is a meaningful boost = to work effectiveness and productivity, where a latency reduction from = 50ms to 10ms wouldn't really yield any material changes to our work.

Is 100Mbps and 10ms latency better than 25Mbps = and 50ms latency? Of course. Moving to ever more capacity and lower = latencies is a good thing on both fronts, but where hardware and = engineering costs tend to scale non-linearly as you start pushing = against current limits, "sufficiency" is an important metric to keep in = mind. Cost matters.

Cheers,
Colin


-----Original= Message-----
From: Starlink <starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> On Behalf Of = starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net
Sent: = Tuesday, April 30, 2024 10:41 AM
To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: = Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 11


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

Message: 1
Date: Tue, = 30 Apr 2024 16:32:51 +0200
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Cc: Hesham = ElBakoury via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC
Message-ID: = <D3B2FA53-589F-4F35-958C-4679EC4414D9@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8

Hi Alexandre,



On 30. Apr 2024, at = 16:25, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
Colin,
8K usefulness over 4K: the higher the = resolution the more it will be possible to zoom in into paused images. =  It is one of the advantages.  People dont do that a lot these = days but why not in the future.

[SM] Because that is how in the past we envisioned the = future, see here h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DhHwjceFcF2Q = 'enhance'...

Spotify lower quality than CD and still usable: one would = check not Spotify, but other services for audiophiles; some of these use = 'DSD' formats which go way beyond the so called high-def audio of 384khz = sampling freqs.  They dont 'stream' but download.  It is these = higher-than-384khz sampling rates equivalent (e.g. DSD1024 is the = equivalent of, I think of something like 10 times CD quality, I think). =  If Spotify is the king of streamers, in the future other companies = might become the kings of something else than 'streaming', a name yet to = be invented.
For each of them, it is true, normal use will = not expose any more advantage than the previous version (no advantage of = 8K over 4K, no advantage of 88KHz DVD audio over CD, etc) - yet the = progress is ongoing on and on, and nobody comes back to CD or to DVD = audio or to SD (standard definition video).
Finally, 8K = and DSD per se are requirements of just bandwidth.  The need of = latency should be exposed there, and that is not straightforward. =  But higher bandwidths will come with lower latencies anyways.

[SM] How that? Capacity and = latency are largely independent... think a semi truck full of harddisks = from NYC to LA has decent capacity/'bandwidth' but lousy latency...


The quest of latency requirements might be, in fact, a quest = to see how one could use that low latency technology that is possible = and available anyways.
Alex
Le 30/04/2024 =C3=A0= 16:00, Colin_Higbie via Starlink a =C3=A9crit :
David Fern=C3=A1ndez, those bitrates are safe = numbers, but many streams could get by with less at those resolutions. = H.265 compression is at a variable bit rate with simpler scenes = requiring less bandwidth. Note that 4K with HDR (30 bits per pixel = rather than 24) consistently also fits within 25Mbps.

David Lang, HDR is a requirement for 4K programming. That is = not to say that all 4K streams are in HDR, but in setting a required = bandwidth, because 4K signals can include HDR, the required bandwidth = must accommodate and allow for HDR. That said, I believe all modern 4K = programming on Netflix and Amazon Prime is HDR. Note David Fern=C3=A1ndez'= point that Spain independently reached the same conclusion as the US = streaming services of 25Mbps requirement for 4K.

Visually, to a person watching and assuming an OLED (or = microLED) display capable of showing the full color and contrast gamut = of HDR (LCD can't really do it justice, even with miniLED backlighting), = the move to HDR from SDR is more meaningful in most situations than the = move from 1080p to 4K. I don't believe going to further resolutions, = scenes beyond 4K (e.g., 8K), will add anything meaningful to a movie or = television viewer over 4K. Video games could benefit from the added = resolution, but lens aberration in cameras along with focal length and = limited depth of field render blurriness of even a sharp picture greater = than the pixel size in most scenes beyond about 4K - 5.5K. Video games = don=E2=80=99t suffer this problem because those scenes are rendered, = eliminating problems from camera lenses. So video games may still = benefit from 8K resolution, but streaming programming won=E2=80=99t.

There is precedent for this in the audio = streaming world: audio streaming bitrates have retracted from prior = peaks. Even though 48kHz and higher bitrate audio available on DVD is = superior to the audio quality of 44.1kHz CDs, Spotify and Apple and most = other streaming services stream music at LOWER quality than CD. It=E2=80=99= s good enough for most people to not notice the difference. I don=E2=80=99= t see much push in the foreseeable future for programming beyond UHD (4K = + HDR). That=E2=80=99s not to say never, but there=E2=80=99s no real = benefit to it with current camera tech and screen sizes.

Conclusion: for video streaming needs over the = next decade or so, 25Mbps should be appropriate. As David Fern=C3=A1ndez = rightly points out, H.266 and other future protocols will improve = compression capabilities and reduce bandwidth needs at any given = resolution and color bit depth, adding a bit more headroom for small = improvements.

Cheers,
Colin


-----Original = Message-----
From: Starlink <starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> On Behalf Of =
starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net
Sent: = Tuesday, April 30, 2024 9:31 AM
To: = starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Starlink Digest, = Vol 37, Issue 9



Message: 2
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:54:20 = +0200
From: David Fern=C3=A1ndez = <davidfdzp@gmail.com>
To: starlink = <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: = [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC
Message-ID:
<CAC=3DtZ0rrmWJUNLvGupw6K8ogADcYLq-eyW7Bjb209oNDWGfVSA@mail.= gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"
Last February, TV broadcasting in Spain left = behind SD definitively and moved to HD as standard quality, also = starting to regularly broadcast a channel with 4K quality.

A 4K video (2160p) at 30 frames per second, = handled with the HEVC compression codec (H.265), and using 24 bits per = pixel, requires 25 Mbit/s.

Full HD video = (1080p) requires 10 Mbit/s.

For lots of 4K = video encoded at < 20 Mbit/s, it may be hard to distinguish it = visually from the HD version of the same video (this was also confirmed = by SBTVD Forum Tests).

Then, 8K will come, = eventually, requiring a minimum of ~32 Mbit/s:
https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-tak= ing-sh
ape-in-europe

The = latest codec VVC (H.266) may reduce the required data rates by at least = 27%, at the expense of more computing power required, but somehow it is = claimed it will be more energy efficient.
https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8= k-broa
dcast-and-broadband-television

Regards,

David

Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 19:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
From:= David Lang <david@lang.hm>
To: Colin_Higbie = <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>
Cc: David Lang = <david@lang.hm>, "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = Re: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC
Message-ID: = <srss5qrq-7973-5q87-823p-30pn7o308608@ynat.uz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"; = Format=3D"flowed"

Amazon, youtube set = explicitly to 4k (I didn't say HDR)

David = Lang

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Colin_Higbie = wrote:


Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 01:30:21 +0000
From: Colin_Higbie <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>
To: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
Cc: = "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = RE: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC

Was= that 4K HDR (not SDR) using the standard protocols that
streaming

services = use (Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, etc.) or was it just some YouTube = 4K SDR videos? YouTube will show "HDR" on the gear icon for content = that's 4K HDR. If it only shows "4K" instead of "HDR," then means it's = SDR.
Note that if YouTube, if left to the default of Auto = for streaming resolution it will also automatically drop the quality to = something that fits within the bandwidth and most of the "4K" content on = YouTube is low-quality and not true UHD content (even beyond missing = HDR). For example, many smartphones will record 4K video, but their = optics are not sufficient to actually have distinct per-pixel image = detail, meaning it compresses down to a smaller image with no real = additional loss in picture quality, but only because it's really a 4K = UHD stream to begin with.

Note that 4K video compression codecs are = lossy, so the lower
quality the

initial image, the lower the bandwidth needed to = convey the stream w/o additional quality loss. The needed bandwidth also = changes with scene complexity. Falling confetti, like on Newy Year's Eve = or at the Super Bowl make for one of the most demanding scenes. Lots of = detailed fire and explosions with fast-moving fast panning full dynamic = backgrounds are also tough for a compressed signal to preserve (but not = as hard as a screen full of falling confetti).

I'm dubious that 8Mbps = can handle that except for some of the
simplest

video, like cartoons or fairly = static scenes like the news. Those scenes don't require much data, but = that's not the case for all 4K HDR scenes by any means.

It's obviously in = Netflix and the other streaming services' interest
to

be able to sell their more = expensive 4K HDR service to as many people as possible. There's a reason = they won't offer it to anyone with less than 25Mbps =E2=80=93 they don't = want the complaints and service calls. Now, to be fair, 4K HDR = definitely doesn=E2=80=99t typically require 25Mbps, but it's to their = credit that they do include a small bandwidth buffer. In my experience = monitoring bandwidth usage for 4K HDR streaming, 15Mbps is the minimum = if doing nothing else and that will frequently fall short, depending on = the 4K HDR content.

Cheers,
Colin



-----Original Message-----
From: = David Lang <david@lang.hm>
Sent: Monday, April 29, = 2024 8:40 PM
To: Colin Higbie = <colin.higbie@scribl.com>
Cc: = starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Starlink] = It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC

hmm, before my = DSL got disconnected (the carrier decided they didn't
want

to support it = any more), I could stream 4k at 8Mb down if there
wasn't = too much other activity on the network (doing so at 2x speed
was a problem)

David Lang


On Fri, 15 Mar 2024, Colin Higbie via Starlink wrote:


Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 18:32:36 +0000
From: = Colin Higbie via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Reply-To: Colin Higbie <colin.higbie@scribl.com>
To: "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC


I have = now been trying to break the common conflation that
download

"speed"

means = anything at all for day to day, minute to minute, second to
second, use, once you crack 10mbit, now, for over 14 years. = Am I
succeeding? I lost the 25/10 battle, and keep = pointing at really
terrible latency under load and wifi = weirdnesses for many existing

100/20 services = today.

While I completely agree = that latency has bigger impact on how

responsive the Internet feels to = use, I do think that 10Mbit is too low for some standard applications = regardless of latency: with the more recent availability of 4K and = higher streaming, that does require a higher minimum bandwidth to work = at all. One could argue that no one NEEDS 4K streaming, but many = families would view this as an important part of what they do with their = Internet (Starlink makes this reliably possible at our farmhouse). 4K = HDR-supporting TV's are among the most popular TVs being purchased in = the U.S. today. Netflix, Amazon, Max, Disney and other streaming = services provide a substantial portion of 4K HDR content.

So, I agree that 25/10 is sufficient, for up = to 4k HDR streaming.
100/20

would provide plenty of bandwidth = for multiple concurrent 4K users or a 1-2 8K streams.

For me, not claiming any special expertise on market needs, = just my
own

personal assessment on what typical = families will need and care about:

Latency: below 50ms under load always feels good except for = some
intensive gaming (I don't see any benefit to getting = loaded latency
further below ~20ms for typical = applications, with an exception for
cloud-based gaming = that benefits with lower latency all the way
down to = about 5ms for young, really fast players, the rest of us
won't be able to tell the difference)

Download Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough if not doing UHD video =
streaming

Download = Bandwidth: 25 - 100Mbps if doing UHD video streaming,
depending on # of streams or if wanting to be ready for 8k

Upload Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough for = quality video
conferencing, higher only needed for = multiple concurrent outbound
streams

So, for example (and ignoring upload for this), I would = rather have

latency= at 50ms (under load) and DL bandwidth of 25Mbps than latency of 1ms = with a max bandwidth of 10Mbps, because the super-low latency doesn't = solve the problem with insufficient bandwidth to watch 4K HDR content. = But, I'd also rather have latency of 20ms with 100Mbps DL, then latency = that exceeds 100ms under load with 1Gbps DL bandwidth. I think the = important thing is to reach "good enough" on both, not just excel at one = while falling short of "good enough" on the other.

Note that Starlink handles all of this well, including kids =
watching

YouTube while my wife and I watch = 4K UHD Netflix, except the upload speed occasionally tops at under 3Mbps = for me, causing quality degradation for outbound video calls (or used = to, it seems to have gotten better in recent months =E2=80=93 no = problems since sometime in 2023).

Cheers,
Colin

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


-------------- next part -------------- An HTML = attachment was
scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachment= s/2024043
0/5572b78b/attachment-0001.html>
_______________________________________________
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



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:40:58 = +0200
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
To: = Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
Cc: Hesham ElBakoury = via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC
Message-ID: = <727b07d9-9dc3-43b7-8e17-50b6b7a4444a@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUTF-8; format=3Dflowed


Le 30/04/2024 =C3=A0 16:32, = Sebastian Moeller a =C3=A9crit :
Hi Alexandre,



On 30. = Apr 2024, at 16:25, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
Colin,
8K usefulness over 4K: the higher the = resolution the more it will be possible to zoom in into paused images. =  It is one of the advantages.  People dont do that a lot these = days but why not in the future.
[SM] Because = that is how in the past we envisioned the future, see here h++ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DhHwjceFcF2Q = 'enhance'...

Spotify lower quality than CD and still usable: one would = check not Spotify, but other services for audiophiles; some of these use = 'DSD' formats which go way beyond the so called high-def audio of 384khz = sampling freqs.  They dont 'stream' but download.  It is these = higher-than-384khz sampling rates equivalent (e.g. DSD1024 is the = equivalent of, I think of something like 10 times CD quality, I think). =  If Spotify is the king of streamers, in the future other companies = might become the kings of something else than 'streaming', a name yet to = be invented.
For each of them, it is true, normal use will = not expose any more advantage than the previous version (no advantage of = 8K over 4K, no advantage of 88KHz DVD audio over CD, etc) - yet the = progress is ongoing on and on, and nobody comes back to CD or to DVD = audio or to SD (standard definition video).
Finally, 8K = and DSD per se are requirements of just bandwidth.  The need of = latency should be exposed there, and that is not straightforward. =  But higher bandwidths will come with lower latencies anyways.
[SM] How that? Capacity and latency are largely = independent... think a semi truck full of harddisks from NYC to LA has = decent capacity/'bandwidth' but lousy latency...

I agree with you: two distinct = parameters, bandwidth and latency.  But they evolve simultenously, = relatively bound by a constant relationship. For any particular = link  technology (satcom is one) the bandwidth and latency are in a = constant relationship.  One grows, the other diminishes.  = There are exceptions too, in some details.

(as for the truck full of harddisks, and jumbo jets full of = DVDs - they are just concepts: striking good examples of how enormous = bandwidths are possible, but still to see in practice; physicsts also = talked about a train transported by a train transported by a train and = so on, to overcome the speed of light: another striking example, but not = in practice).

Alex



The quest of latency = requirements might be, in fact, a quest to see how one could use that = low latency technology that is possible and available anyways.
Alex
Le 30/04/2024 =C3=A0 16:00, Colin_Higbie = via Starlink a =C3=A9crit :
David Fern=C3=A1ndez, those bitrates are safe numbers, but = many streams could get by with less at those resolutions. H.265 = compression is at a variable bit rate with simpler scenes requiring less = bandwidth. Note that 4K with HDR (30 bits per pixel rather than 24) = consistently also fits within 25Mbps.

David = Lang, HDR is a requirement for 4K programming. That is not to say that = all 4K streams are in HDR, but in setting a required bandwidth, because = 4K signals can include HDR, the required bandwidth must accommodate and = allow for HDR. That said, I believe all modern 4K programming on Netflix = and Amazon Prime is HDR. Note David Fern=C3=A1ndez' point that Spain = independently reached the same conclusion as the US streaming services = of 25Mbps requirement for 4K.

Visually, to = a person watching and assuming an OLED (or microLED) display capable of = showing the full color and contrast gamut of HDR (LCD can't really do it = justice, even with miniLED backlighting), the move to HDR from SDR is = more meaningful in most situations than the move from 1080p to 4K. I = don't believe going to further resolutions, scenes beyond 4K (e.g., 8K), = will add anything meaningful to a movie or television viewer over 4K. = Video games could benefit from the added resolution, but lens aberration = in cameras along with focal length and limited depth of field render = blurriness of even a sharp picture greater than the pixel size in most = scenes beyond about 4K - 5.5K. Video games don=E2=80=99t suffer this = problem because those scenes are rendered, eliminating problems from = camera lenses. So video games may still benefit from 8K resolution, but = streaming programming won=E2=80=99t.

There = is precedent for this in the audio streaming world: audio streaming = bitrates have retracted from prior peaks. Even though 48kHz and higher = bitrate audio available on DVD is superior to the audio quality of = 44.1kHz CDs, Spotify and Apple and most other streaming services stream = music at LOWER quality than CD. It=E2=80=99s good enough for most people = to not notice the difference. I don=E2=80=99t see much push in the = foreseeable future for programming beyond UHD (4K + HDR). That=E2=80=99s = not to say never, but there=E2=80=99s no real benefit to it with current = camera tech and screen sizes.

Conclusion: = for video streaming needs over the next decade or so, 25Mbps should be = appropriate. As David Fern=C3=A1ndez rightly points out, H.266 and other = future protocols will improve compression capabilities and reduce = bandwidth needs at any given resolution and color bit depth, adding a = bit more headroom for small improvements.

Cheers,
Colin



-----Original Message-----
From: = Starlink <starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> On Behalf Of =
starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net
Sent: = Tuesday, April 30, 2024 9:31 AM
To: = starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Starlink Digest, = Vol 37, Issue 9



Message: 2
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:54:20 = +0200
From: David Fern=C3=A1ndez = <davidfdzp@gmail.com>
To: starlink = <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: = [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC
Message-ID:
<CAC=3DtZ0rrmWJUNLvGupw6K8ogADcYLq-eyW7Bjb209oNDWGfVSA@mail.= gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"
Last February, TV broadcasting in Spain left = behind SD definitively and moved to HD as standard quality, also = starting to regularly broadcast a channel with 4K quality.

A 4K video (2160p) at 30 frames per second, = handled with the HEVC compression codec (H.265), and using 24 bits per = pixel, requires 25 Mbit/s.

Full HD video = (1080p) requires 10 Mbit/s.

For lots of 4K = video encoded at < 20 Mbit/s, it may be hard to distinguish it = visually from the HD version of the same video (this was also confirmed = by SBTVD Forum Tests).

Then, 8K will come, = eventually, requiring a minimum of ~32 Mbit/s:
https://dvb.org/news/new-generation-of-terrestrial-services-tak= ing-s
hape-in-europe

The = latest codec VVC (H.266) may reduce the required data rates by at least = 27%, at the expense of more computing power required, but somehow it is = claimed it will be more energy efficient.
https://dvb.org/news/dvb-prepares-the-way-for-advanced-4k-and-8= k-bro
adcast-and-broadband-television

Regards,

David

Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 19:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
From:= David Lang <david@lang.hm>
To: Colin_Higbie = <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>
Cc: David Lang = <david@lang.hm>, "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = Re: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC
Message-ID: = <srss5qrq-7973-5q87-823p-30pn7o308608@ynat.uz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"; = Format=3D"flowed"

Amazon, youtube set = explicitly to 4k (I didn't say HDR)

David = Lang

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Colin_Higbie = wrote:


Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 01:30:21 +0000
From: Colin_Higbie <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>
To: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
Cc: = "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = RE: [Starlink] It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC

Was= that 4K HDR (not SDR) using the standard protocols that
streaming

services = use (Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, etc.) or was it just some YouTube = 4K SDR videos? YouTube will show "HDR" on the gear icon for content = that's 4K HDR. If it only shows "4K" instead of "HDR," then means it's = SDR.
Note that if YouTube, if left to the default of Auto = for streaming resolution it will also automatically drop the quality to = something that fits within the bandwidth and most of the "4K" content on = YouTube is low-quality and not true UHD content (even beyond missing = HDR). For example, many smartphones will record 4K video, but their = optics are not sufficient to actually have distinct per-pixel image = detail, meaning it compresses down to a smaller image with no real = additional loss in picture quality, but only because it's really a 4K = UHD stream to begin with.

Note that 4K video compression codecs are = lossy, so the lower
quality the

initial image, the lower the bandwidth needed to = convey the stream w/o additional quality loss. The needed bandwidth also = changes with scene complexity. Falling confetti, like on Newy Year's Eve = or at the Super Bowl make for one of the most demanding scenes. Lots of = detailed fire and explosions with fast-moving fast panning full dynamic = backgrounds are also tough for a compressed signal to preserve (but not = as hard as a screen full of falling confetti).

I'm dubious that 8Mbps = can handle that except for some of the
simplest

video, like cartoons or fairly = static scenes like the news. Those scenes don't require much data, but = that's not the case for all 4K HDR scenes by any means.

It's obviously in = Netflix and the other streaming services'
interest to

be able to sell their more = expensive 4K HDR service to as many people as possible. There's a reason = they won't offer it to anyone with less than 25Mbps =E2=80=93 they don't = want the complaints and service calls. Now, to be fair, 4K HDR = definitely doesn=E2=80=99t typically require 25Mbps, but it's to their = credit that they do include a small bandwidth buffer. In my experience = monitoring bandwidth usage for 4K HDR streaming, 15Mbps is the minimum = if doing nothing else and that will frequently fall short, depending on = the 4K HDR content.

Cheers,
Colin



-----Original Message-----
From: = David Lang <david@lang.hm>
Sent: Monday, April 29, = 2024 8:40 PM
To: Colin Higbie = <colin.higbie@scribl.com>
Cc: = starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Starlink] = It=CA=BCs the Latency, FCC

hmm, before my = DSL got disconnected (the carrier decided they
didn't = want

to support it any more), = I could stream 4k at 8Mb down if there
wasn't too much = other activity on the network (doing so at 2x speed
was a = problem)

David Lang


On = Fri, 15 Mar 2024, Colin Higbie via Starlink wrote:


Date: = Fri, 15 Mar 2024 18:32:36 +0000
From: Colin Higbie via = Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Reply-To: = Colin Higbie <colin.higbie@scribl.com>
To: = "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: = Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC


I have = now been trying to break the common conflation that
download

"speed"

means = anything at all for day to day, minute to minute, second to
second, use, once you crack 10mbit, now, for over 14 years. = Am I
succeeding? I lost the 25/10 battle, and keep = pointing at really
terrible latency under load and wifi = weirdnesses for many
existing

100/20 services = today.

While I completely agree = that latency has bigger impact on how

responsive the Internet feels to = use, I do think that 10Mbit is too low for some standard applications = regardless of latency: with the more recent availability of 4K and = higher streaming, that does require a higher minimum bandwidth to work = at all. One could argue that no one NEEDS 4K streaming, but many = families would view this as an important part of what they do with their = Internet (Starlink makes this reliably possible at our farmhouse). 4K = HDR-supporting TV's are among the most popular TVs being purchased in = the U.S. today. Netflix, Amazon, Max, Disney and other streaming = services provide a substantial portion of 4K HDR content.

So, I agree that 25/10 is sufficient, for up = to 4k HDR streaming.
100/20

would provide plenty of bandwidth = for multiple concurrent 4K users or a 1-2 8K streams.

For me, not claiming any special expertise on market needs, = just
my own

personal assessment on what typical = families will need and care about:

Latency: below 50ms under load always feels good except for = some
intensive gaming (I don't see any benefit to getting = loaded
latency further below ~20ms for typical = applications, with an
exception for cloud-based gaming = that benefits with lower latency
all the way down to = about 5ms for young, really fast players, the
rest of us = won't be able to tell the difference)

Download Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough if not doing UHD video =
streaming

Download = Bandwidth: 25 - 100Mbps if doing UHD video streaming,
depending on # of streams or if wanting to be ready for 8k

Upload Bandwidth: 10Mbps good enough for = quality video
conferencing, higher only needed for = multiple concurrent outbound
streams

So, for example (and ignoring upload for this), I would = rather
have

latency at 50ms (under load) and DL = bandwidth of 25Mbps than latency of 1ms with a max bandwidth of 10Mbps, = because the super-low latency doesn't solve the problem with = insufficient bandwidth to watch 4K HDR content. But, I'd also rather = have latency of 20ms with 100Mbps DL, then latency that exceeds 100ms = under load with 1Gbps DL bandwidth. I think the important thing is to = reach "good enough" on both, not just excel at one while falling short = of "good enough" on the other.

Note that = Starlink handles all of this well, including kids
watching

YouTube while my wife and I watch = 4K UHD Netflix, except the upload speed occasionally tops at under 3Mbps = for me, causing quality degradation for outbound video calls (or used = to, it seems to have gotten better in recent months =E2=80=93 no = problems since sometime in 2023).

Cheers,
Colin

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

-------------- next = part -------------- An HTML attachment was
scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachment= s/202404
30/5572b78b/attachment-0001.html>
_______________________________________________
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


------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

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


------------------------------
End of Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 11
****************************************
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink

= --Apple-Mail=_E0F55299-466E-4316-A888-17433480F04B-- --Apple-Mail=_7D08ED70-8D0B-4F4F-A86F-E7526D776EF9 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----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEERPTGiBqcibajhTSsv0/8FiYdKmAFAmYxQMsACgkQv0/8FiYd KmAS4BAAhQKplx6F2o1djvtHr+gepfrAkK5VqfFPwa638HiUU3kpazqhA/GVNQEk gmb4OxcUMbnXXXqqEy3OCkm3OE9qIEGdniHt3kDrI6k4HXRJd7ymgLILg4M81Ck2 DFt3/mt7+hRO890IVFbv5mgcIPGum+3KcvXUneZvIWc1XfHb05fVPcD+V71coSii 3SO2PL61ACFRweLn1pQ3Nz3pWUg154uq5y9KQkyXq+vUU8V2hNwTKvFF3auKGjou WluOpMoCL+qPWEdpBPGr1xP1dphVNiBzYQ54B6zzKZMzcOIgyaDZOKh3sHCtyLG1 wFn+vm/1Sorwm62Pl6RPwtwbL8NbSFRo8eSpL97JFeC02GlxOXrUbnJ4tLkidQYT KdMkKjiy4lk1Ykyn1LyD3O7CaUDbhaZZD9U6m28Hfd+nzgYY3ePa4xqHNfE4VYQT ZEv6z+Bfm7dnyJV8kivtmjwdDzUODUzpiB38VKtRdpBxnjLk0wGylZBPAFvDjakP IaMUFhHig6KEsywt6tSlm+aEGqSdIg4BKw6O7KDKlkWfalFTDfXc9NemGu5Ptt3x o2jhhATnNTvfNhRyuwbn9bhu5ZcsVLvZ0chJKHDZcUs/nHMoHcuXiiKMBC7R7Hp3 obLFp6aXPccFVjybWuK2tFXs+XxLilDpYcKVLAoIVNKnSxbg1CQ= =Q/w4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_7D08ED70-8D0B-4F4F-A86F-E7526D776EF9--