From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp112.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (smtp112.iad3a.emailsrvr.com [173.203.187.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8327B3B29E for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 20:03:31 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=evslin.com; s=20220608-p431o605; t=1682035411; bh=64zm7NZbqUaOKpdES6GqpycF+Av9SqU6hMgMItHYvq4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=WRESFNH872RI4kgCg5V8JXowmNuRXPgJV95VVoV+7EgaQhhb9YUTxTf44xh1YzFQD eKhe6hcmGWO5aS/KNDfmXLSyKnqXyapy4+lIbi+zlZkQWcLv/YkPPjZqE443qDXNm7 FN1u95IqnFBg10D6lX7VVfL6LnyIwEQu3M1Rselw= X-Auth-ID: tom@evslin.com Received: by smtp39.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: tom-AT-evslin.com) with ESMTPSA id C7AF8550A for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 20:03:30 -0400 (EDT) From: To: References: <3pn5on36-0186-555o-4on4-s0n41q9n05r7@ynat.uz> In-Reply-To: <3pn5on36-0186-555o-4on4-s0n41q9n05r7@ynat.uz> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 20:03:30 -0400 Message-ID: <681b901d973e4$b4ae7490$1e0b5db0$@evslin.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQJ9hR+RKnmumtlFwTh+YdGhNDYB8AJOGkMJAlFBhxUCwRF8Jq2xuzIA Content-Language: en-us X-Classification-ID: b871509d-c8b8-49fb-9320-0fc9c5121a03-1-1 Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink Digest, Vol 25, Issue 28 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: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 00:03:31 -0000 The newest use case is waiting for a response from AI chatbots. We're already conditioned to not have this be immediate. Attributes of this use case are small volumes both up and down but = compute intensity at the datacenter. -----Original Message----- From: Starlink On Behalf Of = David Lang via Starlink Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 6:12 PM To: Eugene Chang Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net; David Fern=E1ndez = Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink Digest, Vol 25, Issue 28 On Thu, 20 Apr 2023, Eugene Chang via Starlink wrote: > Friends, > As I follow the discussion of putting computers on satellite, I can understand the attraction if I apply the discussion with a satellite and server above my location, suspended by a skyhook. The geometry is very = easy (some variations of a triangle). However, with an LEO satellite (or = MEO), most of the time the server is not overhead, it is hidden by the = horizon. > > Have I missed comments (or naively not understood comments) about how = the solutions work when the server is not overhead? I wanted to hear about = data locality and how the desired behavior varies according to the position = of the server. Does some of the proposed edge computing imply (or assume) = the data is needed on many satellites so that there is always a server = overhead with the needed data? (Then we have lots of data synchronization challenges.) Clearly, this suggests there is a scaling problem for edge computing solutions because for a single server, most of the time the computer is not at the edge near me. > > What am I missing? 1. data like DNS where it really is the same everywhere and changes relatively slowly so it works well in this environment. (streaming data could possibly fall in this category, depending on how popular something = is) 2. compute loads where you don't get the answer back immediately and can wait until the next orbit to get the answer (or where the processing = time is large enough that the latency of sending the results around the world = when it's done are small compared to the time it takes to generate the = response) This is not what people think of, as it's not people waiting for the = answer from a browser, but there is a lot more number-crunching than you think. But yes, there are large categories of servers that this won't work for. David Lang > Gene > ----------------------------------- > Eugene Chang > eugene.chang@alum.mit.edu > +1-781-799-0233 (in Honolulu) > > > > > >> On Apr 20, 2023, at 2:24 AM, David Fern=E1ndez via Starlink wrote: >> >> Well, O3b MPower (MEO satellites) is offering independent one hop=20 >> dedicated access to the (Microsoft Azure) cloud as "killer=20 >> application". If the cloud is on the satellite, half-hop. >> >> Starlink GWs are near Google Cloud datacenters. >> >> Blue Origin is on the mission to move Amazon Cloud to orbit,=20 >> eventually, maybe, leaving the Earth as a garden to enjoy, without=20 >> any industry on the surface (in a century, maybe). Kuiper will offer=20 >> one hop access to Amazon Cloud, then half-hop. >> >> What seems a crazy idea today will be eventually implemented later,=20 >> like Starlink (Teledesic failed, fingers crossed Starlink does not go = >> bankrupt, although I would expect it be saved by Department of=20 >> Defense, as Iridium was saved). >> >> As we were discussing recently, maybe starting with anycast DNS=20 >> servers on satellites is a first step to consider, before embarking=20 >> any other type of cloud servers. >> >> Regards, >> >> David >> >>> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 04:33:00 +0000 >>> From: Ulrich Speidel >>> To: "tom@evslin.com" , 'Michael Richardson' >>> , 'starlink' , >>> "e-impact@ietf.org" >>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] DataCenters in Space (was Re: fiber IXPs in >>> space) >>> Message-ID: >>> =09 >>> >> outlook.com> >>> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"windows-1252" >>> >>> Where do I even start? The lack of substantial bandwidth between=20 >>> space and ground? The extra latency between ground and space=20 >>> compared to terrestrial cloud, especially as terrestrial cloud edge=20 >>> can move much closer to customers when space can't? The fact that=20 >>> every LEO satellite is both a few >>> 100 km from every customer and out of the customer's range depending = >>> on when you look? That low temperatures in space don't mean=20 >>> superconductive chips that produce zero heat, and that that heat is=20 >>> difficult to get rid of in space? That generating power in space is=20 >>> orders of magnitude more expensive than on the ground? >>> >>> Just because Starlink can provide a service somewhere between DSL=20 >>> and low to medium grade fibre to a few million around the globe it's = >>> not "done". Even with 10x the number of satellites and a couple of=20 >>> times the current capacity per satellite, Starlink isn't going to=20 >>> supply more than a couple of 100 million at best, and that's not=20 >>> even accounting for growth in demand from IOT... >>> >>> -- >>> >>> **************************************************************** >>> Dr. Ulrich Speidel >>> >>> School of Computer Science >>> >>> Room 303S.594 (City Campus) >>> Ph: (+64-9)-373-7599 ext. 85282 >>> >>> The University of Auckland >>> ulrich@cs.auckland.ac.nz >>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/ >>> **************************************************************** >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > >