From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.taht.net (mail.taht.net [176.58.107.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D1513B29D for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 10:24:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-73-241-93-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.241.93.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.taht.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED04922976; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:24:54 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.80.0.2.43\)) From: Dave Taht In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 07:24:53 -0700 Cc: David Lang , starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5E2A258B-4C5F-476E-A61D-1267993C50FB@teklibre.net> References: <85542036-9ff8-75d2-438e-c86cc0c105d8@sokolov.eu.org> To: Mikael Abrahamsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.80.0.2.43) Subject: Re: [Starlink] 69,000 Users 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, 30 Jun 2021 14:24:56 -0000 > On Jun 30, 2021, at 2:57 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson = wrote: >=20 > On Wed, 30 Jun 2021, David Lang wrote: >=20 >> I suspect that they will be more limited by the number of stations = they can build than the interest from customers. As user density = increases, they will need to launch more satellites, but as Starship = comes online, the cost to do so will drop significantly. >=20 > My opinion here is that it's a bw game. with 1M customers doing a few = megabits/s each, that's significant amount of bw capacity needed. Even = with tens of thousands of satellites (each significant cost to build and = launch), I still don't really see how they'll handle many millions of = customers. >=20 > Terrestrial mobile networks still haven't really come around to = unlimited data that actually works, so we'll see how well Starlink can = do this. >=20 Terrestrial mobile networks still haven=E2=80=99t implemented fq and aqm = technologies.=20 > There was a power outage affecting around 50k households yesterday, I = presume most peoples' residential connections/wifis stopped working, and = they all went mobile. This rendered the local mobile networks basically = unusable, people reported 10s RTT on some of the packets that were = actually delivered. Link? At 250+ms most our protocols start sending more packets, compounding = this problem. Admittedly an outage of this size is probably not something that can be = handled with pure fq+aqm, as it would basically look more like a syn = flood attack! > 5G base stations today are in the gigabits/s magnitude of total air = capacity, even if they have similar for the satellites it's going to be = problematic to keep up. I think they'll have to keep charging a premium = price, higher than today, or implement data cap. I don=E2=80=99t think data caps are needed. fairness is needed. I would prefer a solution that just billed for usage over a minimum.=20 >=20 > --=20 > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink