From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Daniel AJ Sokolov <daniel@sokolov.eu.org>
Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink and bufferbloat status?
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2021 08:58:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw4JD4CaZA9-AxqSq8=42m1QNhNav+-vit+fR67r8BrDNg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4c973572-ab02-2424-c246-6607b8cd6dfe@sokolov.eu.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1915 bytes --]
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 4:07 PM Daniel AJ Sokolov <daniel@sokolov.eu.org> wrote:
>
> On 2021-07-09 at 3:58 p.m., David Lang wrote:
> > IIRC, the definition of 'low latency' for the FCC was something like
> > 100ms, and Musk was predicting <40ms.
>
> Indeed, the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Auction defined "Low Latency"
> as "<100 ms", and "High Latency" as "≤ 750 ms & MOS of ≥4".
Except that it didn't define it under "normal working conditions" - as
in having any load on
that network, nor did it recognize that above 40Mbit, the bufferbloat
generally moves to the
wifi.
(not just to pick on starlink, most wifi setups are pretty broken, as
are most isps,
as soon as you put a load on the network, even a single upload flow
messes up voip and videoconferencing)
so my hope is to move the FCC bar up in the coming months (I was just invited
to join BITAG). I do hope that we see better routers being mandated as a result
in the next funding round.
> MOS is the Mean Opinion Score, which takes latency and jitter into
> account. For "Low Latency", jitter/MOS was not defined. MOS goes from 1
> (Bad) to 5 (Excellent).
MOS is one of my favorite metrics, along with page load time.
The attached graph shows what we now achieve with airtime fairness and
the fq_codel scheduler and AQM
algorithms, in 5 shipping wifi chipsets, under load, and with multiple
stations present. From a MOS of 1, to over 4.
From the paper:
https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc17/atc17-hoiland-jorgensen.pdf
>
> https://www.fcc.gov/auction/904/factsheet
>
> FYI
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
--
Latest Podcast:
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6791014284936785920/
Dave Täht CTO, TekLibre, LLC
[-- Attachment #2: fq_codel_wifi_mos.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 57583 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-10 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.3.1625846401.13780.starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
2021-07-09 18:40 ` David P. Reed
2021-07-09 18:45 ` Nathan Owens
2021-07-09 19:08 ` Ben Greear
2021-07-09 20:08 ` Dick Roy
2021-07-09 22:58 ` David Lang
2021-07-09 23:07 ` Daniel AJ Sokolov
2021-07-10 15:58 ` Dave Taht [this message]
2021-07-16 10:21 ` Wheelock, Ian
2021-07-16 17:08 ` David Lang
2021-07-16 17:13 ` Nathan Owens
2021-07-16 17:24 ` David Lang
2021-07-16 17:29 ` Nathan Owens
2021-07-16 17:31 ` Mike Puchol
2021-07-16 17:35 ` Nathan Owens
2021-07-16 17:39 ` Jonathan Bennett
2021-07-19 1:05 ` Nick Buraglio
2021-07-19 1:20 ` David Lang
2021-07-19 1:34 ` Nick Buraglio
2021-07-17 18:36 ` David P. Reed
2021-07-17 18:42 ` David Lang
2021-07-18 19:05 ` David Lang
2021-07-16 17:38 ` David Lang
2021-07-16 17:42 ` Mike Puchol
2021-07-16 18:48 ` David Lang
2021-07-16 20:57 ` Mike Puchol
2021-07-16 21:30 ` David Lang
2021-07-16 21:40 ` Mike Puchol
2021-07-16 22:40 ` Jeremy Austin
2021-07-16 23:04 ` Nathan Owens
2021-07-17 10:02 ` [Starlink] Free Space Optics - was " Michiel Leenaars
2021-07-17 1:12 ` [Starlink] " David Lang
[not found] ` <d86d6590b6f24dfa8f9775ed3bb3206c@DM6PR05MB5915.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
2021-07-17 15:55 ` Fabian E. Bustamante
2021-07-16 20:51 ` Michael Richardson
2021-07-18 19:17 ` David Lang
2021-07-18 22:29 ` Dave Taht
2021-07-19 1:30 ` David Lang
2021-07-19 12:14 ` Michael Richardson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/starlink.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAA93jw4JD4CaZA9-AxqSq8=42m1QNhNav+-vit+fR67r8BrDNg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel@sokolov.eu.org \
--cc=starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox