[Starlink] Re: Starlink Digest, Vol 53, Issue 14

[Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>]

> On 29. Sep 2025, at 00:58, Michael Richardson via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> David Fernández via Starlink wrote:
>> I understand that SCONE info about maximum possible bandwidth (bottleneck
>> maximum possible bandwidth, not zero, of course) available on the path
>> between a QUIC client and server is not to define a steady state (although
>> it could be), but may be better used to set the size of the initial burst
>> of packets after a connection is established, during the slow start phase,
>> to a value that can be more optimal than just a fixed value like 10 (RFC
>> 6928), which was updated as networks became faster (with more
>> capacity).
> 
> No, that's not the goal as I understand it.
> It's to tell the client that asking for 4K video is not going to work.

However that is a question that actually involves rate-control and IMHO it woukld be better to improve slow-start in general than to taylor a bespoke solution for just video streaming over QUIC.

> Yes, it might be able to get an initial few seconds of 4K, but then the burst
> tolerances (token buckets, etc.) of the network will be exhausted, and the 4K
> will begin to fail.

I keep repeating this, but that solutions are already out there, instead of the maximum signal tell each and every packet about the maximum of the relative capacity usage along a path, now the sender can track and extrapolate the change of that capacity and ideally exit slow start, before over extending the capacity.

> The video will then pause/skip/.. and the client will go back to 2K.
> Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
> 
>> The advantage of QUIC vs. TCP for web browsing should be an increased
>> interactivity, less RTTs to do connections, more responsiveness of sites,
>> less lag and latency, although it seems people is not really noticing the
>> difference after sites start using HTTP/3 vs. HTTP/2.
> 
> Probably the most important thing is that it gets rid of head of queue blocking.
> 
>> For example, today, the following site was reported as recently starting
>> using HTTP/3:
>> Pokemon.com (https://w3techs.com/sites/info/pokemon.com)
> 
>> If anybody made a survey to usual Pokemon site visitors, I wonder if they
>> noticed that change.
> 
> When I think about QUIC, I think about PsyDuck for some reason.
> When I think about TCP, I think about JigglyPuff.
> Or maybe Kirby (not a pokemon).
> And, when I think about UUCP, I think about Thomas the Tank Engine.
> Yes, I was a parent over the last 20 years.

:)

> 
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list -- starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> To unsubscribe send an email to starlink-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net