Le 04/06/2024 à 22:58, Eugene Y Chang via Starlink a écrit : > For automobiles, the sensation of speed comes from engine noise and > the G-force at the seat-of-your-pants. > > I think of it as mostly the second derivative of the motion (aka > acceleration). > > For snappiness of a network action, it is the time interval from > activation to completion. This perception can be enhanced by giving > quick feedback (response) while many things are still in motion (still > incomplete). > > We do need to agree on what makes a network snappy and how that is > measured. I think a part of qualifying a communications network as 'snappy' is to hold a 1-to-1 long-range audio conversation that acts as much as possible as an in-person conversation to a person nearby. Landline phones still excel at that and should be the benchmark. A 'tele-presence' over satcom linking several persons each speaking in high density bursts might need a 1ms RTT latency. Alex > > > > Gene > ---------------------------------------------- > Eugene Chang > eugene.chang@ieee.org > > > > > > >> On Jun 4, 2024, at 10:06 AM, Sauli Kiviranta via Starlink >> wrote: >> >> Good examples Stuart, it is quite interesting that as humanity we >> have not come up with aggregate term what would fairly collapse the >> dimensions to one single metric that would describe the snappy >> feeling we intuitively seek for but can not quite verbalize. Vehicles >> have the same issues, we have top speed (F1 at 360mph feels fast >> compared to Starship at 16000mph), we have acceleration (Hot-rod >> going 0 to 60 mph in 5 seconds feels high but pales in comparison to >> Tesla going 0 to 60 mph in 2 sec), we have horse powers (tractor >> plowing field with 300hp feels great but seems small compared to >> 1000hp of Hot-rod) then also there is torque (tractor with 1450 Nm of >> torque wins a Tesla having 900Nm on wheel while at completely >> different torque curve). >> >> Capacity has the same issue as literally the truck from your example >> shipping magnetic tapes for "raw carry capacity" but it does not feel >> responsive, snappy, good to handle in the "traffic" of Internet. We >> have jitter, that could be compared to how a vehicle does in >> repeatability of track laps? We have packet loss on how the car >> handles on curves and does it slip off the track or on accelerations >> spin the wheels? Download is speed forward, upload is almost like >> speed at reverse gear usually far worse. Latency is like a lap track >> as such, depends on the track, use-case specific tests "What time did >> it do on Nürburgring?" or "How fast does it go from 0 to 60Mbps? Less >> than 200ms?". Horse power feels much like raw capacity of the HW / >> radio channel and techniques available beam forming, frequencies etc. >> what was discussed here related to Starlink and even collectively >> across different technologies. Speed is then instead of how much >> specific combination of modem and base-station combo can achieve at >> certain configuration? Torque feels like ability to maintain that >> performance, closest we get is loaded performance in context of >> bufferbloat? >> >> Watching videos on Netflix require different performance >> characteristics than downloading a big update to Fortnite. One has >> certain acceleration need to have snappy user experience but focus is >> more on connection stability at certain bitrate. On the other hand >> Fortnite update you want to be delivered at brute force speeds >> without ruining others user experience. >> >> Maybe we can not find that aggregate property or metric, but just >> need to be rigorous on making sure we accurately characterize each >> dimension and standardize them so the confusion and play with words, >> specially with marketing, get stabilized. Each needs to have >> standardized benchmarks much like 3D rendering benchmarks and PC perf >> tests are done? All that said, as I failed to come up with a perfect >> term, "varying performance ISP links" feels like the right thing to >> say? Now we have obfuscated to be able to throw any of the dimensions >> underneath. Only thing left for us to do is then to provide those >> dimensions like a nutrient labels. We are getting there? Nothing new >> under the sun also to some extend. >> >> Just as a funny side note on the tractor marketing: >> >> ”Torque gives you the feeling of responsiveness and that the machine >> does the right things,” Tapani Katila encapsulates his view. “The >> torque is directly linked to the feeling of having power available in >> the entire range of the power curve, resulting in more meaningful >> work.” from >> https://www.agcopower.com/power-is-important-but-torque-is-crucial/ >> >> Seems like some other people are also trying to figure out what >> dimensions to showcase to customers? >> >> Thank you for the thought provoking examples! >> >> Is bufferbloat property of a vehicle or characteristic of the road >> design? Is it a question of ICE vs EV -or- roundabout vs crossing >> with traffic lights? Feels more like a roundabout, no? Is this the >> problem behind the objections? >> >> - Sauli >> >> On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 9:19 PM Stuart Cheshire via Starlink >> wrote: >> >> On May 7, 2024, at 18:48, Dave Taht via Starlink >> wrote: >> >> > This was a wonderful post, rich! >> >> >> >> I agree. Thanks for writing this Rich. >> >> One minor change I will request. Any time you write words like >> “speed” or “fast”, pause and consider whether it would be more >> accurate to use some other term like “capacity”, “bandwidth”, or >> “throughput”. Part of what keeps us in this mess is that people >> equate network capacity with “speed”, as if those terms were >> synonyms. We can’t change how people think overnight, but at >> least we can avoid further reinforcing that wrong thinking. >> >> If someone has 200 Mb/s Internet service and it feels slow, then >> they might upgrade to 400 Mb/s Internet service and expect >> everything to be uniformly twice as fast. We here know that >> doubling the network capacity may make large downloads faster, >> but everything else is most likely unchanged, and can be even worse. >> >> People never make this mistake in other contexts. If someone >> commutes to work in their 20-foot RV feels that it’s too slow, >> then upgrading to a 40-foot RV will not get them to work faster. >> A 40-foot RV is *bigger* than a 20-foot RV, but it’s probably not >> *faster*. If you are moving a vast amount of cargo that requires >> multiple trips, then a larger truck will let you complete that >> task in fewer trips. But for most daily driving, a bigger truck >> will not get to your destination any quicker. >> >> Some simple edits: >> >> Instead of “varying speed ISP links” how about “varying capacity >> ISP links”? >> >> Instead of “they profit if you decide your network is too slow >> and you upgrade to a faster device/plan” how about “they profit >> if you decide your network is too slow and you upgrade to a >> higher throughput device/plan”? >> >> Stuart Cheshire >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink