From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68AB43B29D for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2022 14:44:21 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1665945854; bh=PkUL22YDU3aqUbUOmc3yGx2xwFyUVNSiME5BKJv0q8I=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=l692/WG1c3mM0IQKg+L2/y6zPcCg4QwYhrAYHz0J/l3YojuCSd1+1cCaVdnMyEbBo Pqml//Pz4EtD5g88QbsngLugcY3QO5MjKRjQEVo0fnEghScndDXvGD50SuWNk3VhV/ KCk7qz857NgiwoyXrhBiKnqN/3z5nMQjLUwZ8z0Y= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from smtpclient.apple ([87.148.161.152]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mw9QC-1p0i1y2NpU-00s9xB; Sun, 16 Oct 2022 20:44:14 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <1ro0q1n3-s460-9r2r-p7rn-526q1qq9qp27@ynat.uz> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 20:44:12 +0200 Cc: Vint Cerf , Starlink list Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7AFAA1E1-B583-4A42-B188-6D80F9C2DDD5@gmx.de> References: <8735bqpq1r.wl-jch@irif.fr> <38522124-6d3b-4ac8-bb20-92bfa35dc9fe@Spark> <87tu46o8e3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <3ea89257-d5f8-4fa9-a90a-c73d49d2a9e2@Spark> <87r0zao0f0.wl-jch@irif.fr> <398208s8-6080-r8q7-s6rs-q9np11428n3o@ynat.uz> <12bfd01d8e001$03cf0e40$0b6d2ac0$@evslin.com> <1ro0q1n3-s460-9r2r-p7rn-526q1qq9qp27@ynat.uz> To: David Lang X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:5VZqIFfbO4TBmIEqZ3O6NYNXoVWVxbjqDGf47txniFavfF5IBZ7 N2mpHUsZUObAoS6Fs/vi5VTlDk4R75C6OPeMv1NJvN2GdoE80JMr9+F94a9F4/zDQep4q2k PTuISwXEeRSAjy9HL5YoP2j5so+ojzQwwQJ1QLaZZwjEqHWf8TRJlKOEP70U68J2IPUAeRD 1cSTwdQceRUwtBQXpeGBA== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:MyqOKcHaX30=:ylkBn5B6XtDUAyCOICFCc9 5hrsX7aEbuZtqoSZB5CflDlNFLSplCusIaBF3J2cx31wtjkLSwdn+Zc5VsWtP645JwaTQtUkg AsM8NsgI8UugjLCWAeKDpquEjPr/rQj/Pyvex4tqLxRvy3IciqwYYVj7+tDXIJJ0gmQXA3KZY NyTor2/UnM2Vpk+tBrT1qvBD0vvNBPrvrvntm78IA7kbnV0KVvClj/w+1RTJy3KSgHh/f54Y4 n3Q6I+lGMwT7RB8lAvVfLKr6z8KM3G+x3tRdBTpdeCAbGXHgoztd3Z9S3MZGMVFmv7eK9vkI8 MuUJSVEXbuqDconPUxyK4OlEu6+DjRt2tn5jaESudP8vt41hjY7FwLWJPj2z3m6cVZA13z8YS YXzsWxq1xNRkfwgyn2h8KitaIDvJCfKuZ0MO62pvD3B3/Z08NQOaXqYnHifJfuKedA6/QuN4Z UR2HYedWv2N/cE+17Qt3iLylu1p/D5Ro0oiSdA6TEESGtws1U+utLIJOJJSMqID7qHfpSWEka Fy3EbdarHCG02ziWiy4/nRiJ0T+Ydn0AehNUN9x+iFclf6tcabwS5f9QH9OEZd3iCnVvY8Q0x V2Z96XvX+Q9vT6PHM2wz/dKShDsdoL+nkPYi+uzR1ZNgisdt9vidChORWP1SGpB5chBexiKAf m/6WjY/MADNv3TD4FUo6YeziV7EeN84rBMYOvhveFc/OjgliycDC0Cg6AXppSt4Ac1wMVWzVu M4l0KeiR4J9OFwSlmKXbj1BB3bCGXFkHkYH8x4RAl7sqVK0kkU7qjtYx4NZwNg5Oed7uXzQPg jk5omZXVJ/z2pnOBGojvSFSp1Hxmhlvau9sGraLuczsop+11rxU3Bicy/Ns6WtnK5/AE1NcNh ey1J0V3kC7V8hTx+A7wc6sC21pcLBUehRW/EArug4h1XPI9q1mniM5r6jP7sTMD2l1wMUGcf0 wJLM0jmMsO6Om/awucZm5DZF0PcNVtS0ODxklmdGWbXeDY1R1sLbidLsgkJAwT6J0NJHT5hTf pVN2/L0mDAsDfPHiCrmCyWiBavwtBBileOnpp5WdCbWgdcGAnMuuXYOyZGWT99EI6l/gX2OKw jI/ec21RvRn5hkc0+gjVzp4WZ0OyRammSRcOOo7QwOqbs31l/H+MGjwUtqmTX349HzFSbIHbD I2YFBhrF/EpxMy9IGYVXERWKzA09/AO1jzZSD8g2XAUObpIe+QaSWIrW9RdODVHz1l7g3cYfQ CoR80yz9XHTPAAnzHolroGPjj+Q4mK0qv6+mRu2Fe+SH34OJMyazUZv/4HLnjAR/34fdRtT9l Gy9CoIItbg990A6rvfjJ6FswFQUsy3YqwFuWsNe+i32otBtzmhd50Smwi8b7USuFyhid8ziWp 0DSt+M42y+Tc6mgidotXX1kd2WkhtSbP5QKX+/cUxYwChZkMYzWXY4azA/PvkOrWBJvfPPyst ryYpB2MJK3pJIOH0hlT2/aW8WlOl6qiNyhSc+bI1jDOaud6IqxfwIFc/M+8lOwcZTa4tm4W9o u6OW6Bs1lSFcW7GX/4rrEP9v1vfHB/V9WMf3w2hnYbT0z Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink no longer available to the Ukrainian army? 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: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 18:44:21 -0000 Hi David, > On Oct 16, 2022, at 20:33, David Lang via Starlink = wrote: >=20 > and it's worth remembering that it's not just being used for military = C&C, it's being used for (almost) all Internet access through the = country, normal telcom, Hospitals, community access, etc. Do we know this for sure? As far as I know (so not very much, = one of my colleagues in the early 2000s was Ukranian and told me about = their figer optics telephony system) Ukraine might have some fiber = infrastructure that should make at least the west not fully reliant on = Starlkink. Regards Srbastian >=20 > That will add up to a lot (and the 7TB of use was also back in May) >=20 > David Lang >=20 > On Sun, 16 Oct 2022, Vint Cerf via Starlink wrote: >=20 >> if you need real-time for video and control, that can add up ... >>=20 >> v >>=20 >>=20 >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 2:01 PM Dave Taht via Starlink < >> starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: >>=20 >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:57 AM Nathan Owens via Starlink >>> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Elon posted a graph, it showed a peak of 7000GB per unit time, the = only >>> one that makes sense to me is per hour, which is 15Gbps peak -- not = a huge >>> amount. >>>=20 >>> You really don't need much data for C&C traffic. You do need a = fairly >>> reliable uplink, but the observed jitter on an otherwise idle link = was >>> in the few ms range. >>>=20 >>> GPSD has a udp output mode, too. >>>=20 >>> (btw, to my knowledge, starlink has not enabled any network = interfaces >>> to the outside to their internal on-dish gps chip, which >>> when I was whinging about it, would provide perfect time to >>> downstream clients, either natively or via ntp) >>>=20 >>> It's one very short message, per second. >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:50 AM Steve Stroh via Starlink < >>> starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> I=E2=80=99m speculating, but given that Starlink is THE = communications >>> infrastructure for much of Ukraine, then the scaling of the ground = stations >>> to provide that level of service must be a significant expense. To = provide >>> that much bandwidth would require deploying a lot of ground = stations, each >>> with expensive hardware, power infrastructure (including backup), = fiber >>> backhaul, skilled labor, and no small amount of fiber bandwidth that = SpaceX >>> has to pay SOMEONE to provide. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Not to mention that anything SpaceX deploys to support Ukraine is = a >>> resource that it could have used for speeding up revenue generation = in >>> lucrative markets like the US. >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 12:41 David Lang via Starlink < >>> starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> If spacex is providing the high-end/business grade service to all >>> terminals >>>>>> that they normally charge $4500/month for, reimbursement should = be >>> based on >>>>>> that. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Base it on the normal service pricing, not on cost-plus (if it = were >>> based on >>>>>> cost-plus it would be an utter windfall for SpaceX as they are = still >>> in the >>>>>> stage of building the service, and so there is a much higher = spend >>> rate to >>>>>> expand the service at this point than the ongoing maintinance of = it) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> while the satellites do support that area, they also support the = rest >>> of the >>>>>> service, and if they weren't supporting Ukraine, there wouldn't = be any >>> fewer >>>>>> satellites launched. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I've seen too many games played with 'fully loaded costs' = (sometimes >>> backfiring >>>>>> on the people tinkering with the numbers), and so it's something = I >>> watch out >>>>>> for. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> lies, damn lies, and statistics, 'fully loaded costs' tend to be = heavy >>> on >>>>>> statistics ;-) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> David Lang >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022, tom@evslin.com wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Putting aside the timing of Elon's complaint about cost right = after >>> the spat over his Ukrainian "peace plan", It is certainly reasonable = for >>> Starlink to get paid like other weapon suppliers who didn't give out = free >>> samples to prove their usefulness, Given that they should be = reimbursed >>> based on loaded cost plus profit like anyone else. I'm sure the = other >>> suppliers allocate their overhead costs when pricing weapon systems. = They'd >>> be out of business otherwise. The satellites are part of Starlink's = fixed >>> overhead so a portion of their costs should be allocated to service >>> provided in Ukraine. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> All that being said, it would be terrible if Ukraine got less = than >>> the best support that can be provided. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Starlink On = Behalf >>> Of David Lang via Starlink >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2022 1:28 PM >>>>>>> To: Kurtis Heimerl >>>>>>> Cc: Starlink list >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink no longer available to the >>> Ukrainian army? >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Having now read more info on this, less significant than the = $80m >>> total figure is the $20m/month figure he quoted. With 15k dishes as = the >>> figure that they sent (separate from whatever has been purchased on = the >>> commercial side), that works out to 1.3k/dish/month, which is very = high. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> now, not being able to deploy reliable ground stations inside >>> Ukraine could be driving up costs, plus the ongoing battle against = jamming. >>> But in his tweet he also cites satellite costs, which should not be >>> allocated as "Ukraine related" >>>>>>> costs (and I don't think the cyberdefense and jamming defense = work >>> should be >>>>>>> either) >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> David Lang >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022, Kurtis Heimerl via Starlink wrote: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> This thread = (https://twitter.com/dim0kq/status/1580827171903635456) >>>>>>>> strongly argues that Starlink is largely paid for their = service, at >>>>>>>> least on the consumer side. I imagine there are significant >>>>>>>> operational expenses in dealing with the various actors = involved but >>>>>>>> not on the basic model. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:06 AM Juliusz Chroboczek via Starlink >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> In essence, once you give something away for free, not even >>> setting >>>>>>>>>> the expectation that it=E2=80=99s a =E2=80=9Cfreemium=E2=80=9D = model, it=E2=80=99s very hard to >>> get >>>>>>>>>> out of it. If you then claim your costs are way higher than = what >>>>>>>>>> analysis work out, eyebrows raise way above the hairline. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Uh. Hmm. >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Starlink mailing list >>>>>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >>>>>=20 >>>>> -- >>>>> Steve Stroh N8GNJ (he / him / his) >>>>> Editor >>>>> Zero Retries Newsletter - https://zeroretries.substack.com >>>>>=20 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> -- >>> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work: >>>=20 >>> = https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-6981366665= 607352320-FXtz >>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Starlink mailing list >>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink