From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) (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 CE3653B29D for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:30:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1e65a1370b7so59769145ad.3 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:30:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ieee.org; s=google; t=1714527045; x=1715131845; 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=2Eibz87b7uNPkaKVg7Lh2aZo23Bde0f+VxE6SlVfptA=; b=duzLAOpDPcLgkz9DMCmEOtlIbrTBpryOkHB+obtALR1IiLT6VbTR7QE+i39AGDpLM+ a+Ti3zyc6uS9NlY+xNpEmMchtOZpr/a8iZqBXWKG+VOntLjjXNoadsBIkTrs42yxFLqW 8d6EnVnaV/ZTQ60qzqOvOLMfzWBkUude8r8ag= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1714527045; x=1715131845; 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=2Eibz87b7uNPkaKVg7Lh2aZo23Bde0f+VxE6SlVfptA=; b=dNDBfXJawA9EP7Ipz3fmlmhJ8q4LmEYGk6Dn+Hu6fHgj2WWSWPCznM7xlyZyFhd9eI +Z58Tv+u9/2QutgIBfpr26Mnr/ou+mw8JIs1MDhI+5YQbdhxn51ukeJY7rOflTL7/b7f PWK2SNcH6l4vBHCAVdHwaWSzBZzzj6FKrFUHZTUo4i5/j4jYAsmgQzqsyvlJe5vpedQP Cr4W5B28S/pXkQ+hp7Fgc9ROqauLe1bYSslZLlK91t1kYYtmopbTfFi4JDKQBKFX6hB3 YgeKPWhXYAvdmkz45geOPVWb8aryApAUaiZIrFo4OF5EeWGU1icT7/DvjW3oM6yHsRTS NbeQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV6WIKeVR/DTyuhjpz/j/3eL8aX4mJ+2Vs8c3w7ZymeZIaU4c79IWWl8MMjZcSb5xcTD0n0khxviG9vufSbD/YrKE1a7KuUXLScnRm3KMY= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwguT8Yrh+WGaPOsXf5s3ZMohpFWNcIpiJc0ijfP8sAz2k9Qv6T dPLrp6lJb2QS0EWf+BY6Ygyr3dR79fVXOlrgV+o7dEgeP2c4ek022ikv+E6++g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFllzoCrDnsPt7WlOG2AZy0GH/8bb+XCRNhQD+s4C8BHuJNDay7c6pA2yPbshUy8WjAZYLwGg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d4c8:b0:1eb:7746:4237 with SMTP id o8-20020a170902d4c800b001eb77464237mr1352676plg.19.1714527044259; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (dhcp-72-253-194-45.hawaiiantel.net. [72.253.194.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id im23-20020a170902bb1700b001ec852124f6sm456122plb.309.2024.04.30.18.30.43 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:30:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Eugene Y Chang Message-Id: <79C02ABB-B2A6-4B4D-98F4-6540D3F96EBB@ieee.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7F407812-0C92-4D23-8C7C-EDCA792FA903"; 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 15:30:41 -1000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Eugene Y Chang , Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink To: David Lang References: <438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.8) Subject: Re: [Starlink] =?utf-8?q?It=CA=BCs_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: Wed, 01 May 2024 01:30:46 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7F407812-0C92-4D23-8C7C-EDCA792FA903 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3706162D-985A-43F8-8FE3-00153C598833" --Apple-Mail=_3706162D-985A-43F8-8FE3-00153C598833 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 David, The bandwidth mantra has been used for so long that a technical = discussion cannot unseat the mantra. Some technical parties use the mantra to sell more, faster, ineffective = service. Gullible customers accept that they would be happy if they = could afford even more speed. Shouldn=E2=80=99t we create a demo to show the solution? To show is more effective than to debate. It is impossible to explain to = some people. Has anyone tried to create a demo (to unseat the bandwidth mantra)? Is an effective demo too complicated to create? I=E2=80=99d be glad to participate in defining a demo and publicity = campaign. Gene ---------------------------------------------- Eugene Chang IEEE Life Senior Member > On Apr 30, 2024, at 2:36 PM, David Lang wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Eugene Y Chang via Starlink wrote: >=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> While watching stream content, activating controls needed to switch = content sometimes (often?) have long pauses. I attribute that to buffer = bloat and high latency. >>=20 >> 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.) >>=20 >> 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.) >=20 > it's largely a solved problem from a technical point of view. fq_codel = and cake solve this. >=20 > The solution is just not deployed widely, instead people argue that = more bandwidth is needed instead. >=20 > David Lang >=20 >=20 >> Gene >> ---------------------------------------------- >> Eugene Chang >>=20 >>=20 >>> 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 >>=20 > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink --Apple-Mail=_3706162D-985A-43F8-8FE3-00153C598833 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 David,

The bandwidth mantra has been used = for so long that a technical discussion cannot unseat the = mantra.
Some technical parties use the mantra to sell more, = faster, ineffective service. Gullible customers accept that they would = be happy if they could afford even more speed.

Shouldn=E2=80=99t we create a demo to show the = solution?
To show is more effective than to debate. It is = impossible to explain to some people.
Has anyone tried to = create a demo (to unseat the bandwidth mantra)? 
Is an = effective demo too complicated to create?
I=E2=80=99d be glad = to participate in defining a demo and publicity campaign.

Gene
----------------------------------------------
Eugene Chang
IEEE Life Senior Member




On Apr 30, 2024, at 2:36 PM, David Lang <david@lang.hm> = wrote:

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Eugene Y Chang via Starlink wrote:

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.)

it's largely a solved problem = from a technical point of view. fq_codel and cake solve this.

The solution is just not deployed widely, = instead people argue that more bandwidth is needed instead.

David Lang


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

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

= --Apple-Mail=_3706162D-985A-43F8-8FE3-00153C598833-- --Apple-Mail=_7F407812-0C92-4D23-8C7C-EDCA792FA903 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----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEERPTGiBqcibajhTSsv0/8FiYdKmAFAmYxm0EACgkQv0/8FiYd KmC0XA/9FILHkcjhUY5Hu6DC21TU/ZKhsNnpU1T3OUBhzSe4uiynzyvdegi6cc5t xo4TBXnWKfrux5w6KdHI3M0nBEjXx5L0BbEzLJoIz3tH+BPp7VhhOnEassx5C1Ru SG3zgXKW5tfPtr/rvCZOhPsWNuUov0+aZ6RHVMt9NxJtIOJMsc1oomN6nFFbYrN+ a5xVWP3PaKNC5ReFq5zsnDRKjrauJbsa86oq271iBrJk51NB78mvdlRS53J16zpd 2PYfRq46BxD6GFXssa/UnJQa7m8y7OaCHtnPi+QIVxizMl49e+1l7LewTwB52nzP hdXG7WoNwtl4ztTaiAABbr/BQGX4fkMjbYkv8csUKDO0/bo9HjGMmdrsjx+o+OJI oT44hvtXX20wTmAjfJvCPvsAyF4kz3nkRJ1aAJ0cbU6tbvx8rFrr2jvCNKNaVPCs hAyPq7Zd8EMfwa0dnbLjmSuzSyC1P8gjuqn4efkndlqFLQfnidIC6S3wQKR1sBkM s/LpUaZVF09t/CHhuTxzLlmQXmrDp0zG1kW1jv8h0By7JsLK+8BQrohbmwwoubRr t7OoFzTU+fSnNkDgj01uOtKc37dNUqPW+gMPv7IhErbgvYo94NtvxiZexeSOZ2Tu u10eqy+bsrT/fugcdYCZaHcJsox1CF6RBUWdX2TYEyDSk0Ex32s= =PBrC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_7F407812-0C92-4D23-8C7C-EDCA792FA903--