From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-x42a.google.com (mail-wr1-x42a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42a]) (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 8EB3E3B29D; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:08:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-34d8f6cfe5bso692885f8f.3; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:08:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1714511283; x=1715116083; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Tud/8TKENxgyrgfqHHdLGBvCVcuUB+VEF25LoUoN4HE=; b=c8gB86zwJ3g/McXYZiAWZsAKJGRp/qoBrC/w64GKkqcpo4akwNykmcYBTJyUiESbFR LOOoRii98wiMVsZPiy3z3s6szIvAyFAJPuGa/Y4hNRzkuTusObLqlEWr0RXc8XDKF0r8 Js7asDWxNJK8qal9Xc87F53G1qyQ+tzT5TJeAV7PUwlKlUfVhSLphl4mXuFSpYJ8EFQX EBLw8Sko/rXWgMJ/bJVOB+hcaMSnJf1K745eJIs8Pd5jnr06pnjZoLgxmVelCygMdTQa BfWcpTNplLiAYz42sGofsLdJ2PAS9RAex7ssJ74GU2gY3DadwgrmxB9AR/fJjiAxwybM CLfQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1714511283; x=1715116083; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Tud/8TKENxgyrgfqHHdLGBvCVcuUB+VEF25LoUoN4HE=; b=biAnneQiWnUoap8i+RiLQemSwd1Ncz1KyZzMqt9Hd0fLkT2dHWX3q+i22jnqFZSih9 gzWsI0ywjxkdNXILq+NmOOCZ2nTjeZuNXFZEqqxqylcpMJs1LS24IdJJ9RbUX+R2OoJr b9RXsFu5Itsej+97jzzTIBcK9c57ISJl17ztwQGxb82rm5d1KKFRRmlAKWCEFkaYauvB T8jImJ5QAqCVA7000t09XkNRm/1dUOcZU4/EUAWK5c7gI72Vn7GMs9C5tUBbFFn+jbWI VlIhGH6du4IYA8YPED0qS//XY3LNOVhM/g5mHGnsp+iooiyrdnYxXsadBjyEXm09JfWm RPiQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCW9Pi7p8QytNMhQg33/D86d4d5yINdouwoAkMeG4Rzca344/kSvw5NPiIpnrtwQNGUnGMdxFChvnFg+z6csNdKCcujXyYxSAJHVO6EOOaClIEFaymjJEKGrcIJNCYjZfyA5B89WfKMgz+L/Xl5z8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzyv24y9/KVndiHfUv9aFPI4GtRbKP17WANiKdqmbzuykfT+oB2 oFXAvsH/TNaQY1HUzX+pXYwmXqyhoGMvx8bLmFBBQ8I1uKu7r9ETgBUNjhrtzvfe8OWPc47Ne7h u3h37mRybUtY3xGjPy3h91oIUkwQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGF6q5C7nCQlFQru8j0OkMNxyHneGyHRohLhYPYh2O5dqCER9ipNiMqqYhKyYpPagIEohhATGhkJmNzcybBjlc= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:47cd:0:b0:349:7ebc:d1 with SMTP id o13-20020a5d47cd000000b003497ebc00d1mr592556wrc.36.1714511283388; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:08:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1A972680-ECA5-42CA-BE8B-6BBD46FF5E74@ieee.org> In-Reply-To: <1A972680-ECA5-42CA-BE8B-6BBD46FF5E74@ieee.org> From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:07:51 -0700 Message-ID: To: Eugene Y Chang Cc: Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink , libreqos Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000028941061756c4ba" Subject: Re: [Starlink] =?utf-8?q?It=E2=80=99s_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: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:08:04 -0000 --000000000000028941061756c4ba Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just fq codel or cake everything and you get all that. Libreqos is free software for those that do not want to update their data plane. Perhaps we should do a public demo of what it can do for every tech on the planet. Dsl benefits, fiber does also (but it is the stats that matter more on fiber because the customer wifi becomes bloated) Starlink merely fq codeled their wifi and did some aqm work (not codel I think) to get the amazing results they are getting today. I don't have the waveform test results handy but they are amazing. I feel a sea change in the wind... On Tue, Apr 30, 2024, 12:51=E2=80=AFPM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink < starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > Colin, > I am overwhelmed with all the reasons that prevent low(er) or consistent > latency. > I think that our best ISP offerings should deliver graceful, agile, or > nimble service. Sure, handle all the high-volume data. The high-volume > service just shouldn=E2=80=99t preclude graceful service. Yes, the curren= t ISP > practices fall short. Can we help them improve their service? > > Am I asking too much? > > Gene > ---------------------------------------------- > Eugene Chang > IEEE Life Senior Member > > > > > On Apr 30, 2024, at 9:31 AM, Colin_Higbie via Starlink < > starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > Gene, > > I think the lion's share of other people (many brilliant people here) on > this thread are focused on keeping latency down when under load. I > generally just read and don't contribute on those discussions, because > that's not my area of expertise. I only posted my point on bandwidth, not > to detract from the importance of reducing latency, but to correct what I > believed to be an important error on minimum bandwidth required to be abl= e > to perform standard Internet functions. > > To my surprise, there was pushback on the figure, so I've responded to tr= y > to educate this group on streaming usage in the hope that the people > working on the latency problem under load (core reason for this group to > exist) can also be aware of the minimum bandwidth needs to ensure they > don't plan based on bad assumptions. > > For a single user, minimum bandwidth (independent of latency) needs to be > at least 25Mbps assuming the goal is to provide access to all standard > Internet services. Anything short of that will deny users access to the > primary streaming services, and more specifically won't be able to watch = 4K > HDR video, which is the market standard for streaming services today and > likely will remain at that level for the next several years. > > I think it's fine to offer lower-cost options that don't deliver 4K HDR > video (not everyone cares about that), but at least 25Mbps should be > available to an Internet customer for any new Internet service rollout. > > Cheers, > Colin > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Starlink On Behalf Of > starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 3:05 PM > To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15 > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:04:43 -1000 > From: Eugene Y Chang > To: Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink > > Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC > Message-ID: <438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" > > I am always surprised how complicated these discussions become. (Surprise= d > mostly because I forgot the kind of issues this community care about.) Th= e > 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.) > > Gene > ---------------------------------------------- > Eugene Chang > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > --000000000000028941061756c4ba Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just fq codel or cake everything and you get all that.
Libreqos is free software for th= ose that do not want to update their data plane. Perhaps we should do a pub= lic demo of what it can do for every tech on the planet. Dsl benefits, fibe= r does also (but it is the stats that matter more on fiber because the cust= omer wifi becomes bloated)

Starlink merely fq codeled their wifi and did some aqm work (not codel I= think) to get the amazing results they are getting today. I don't have= the waveform test results handy but they are amazing. I feel a sea change = in the wind...



On Tue, Apr 30, 2024, 12:51=E2=80=AFPM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.n= et> wrote:
Colin,
I am overwhelmed= with all the reasons that prevent low(er) or consistent latency.
I think that our best ISP offerings should deliver graceful, agile, or nim= ble service. Sure, handle all the high-volume data. The high-volume service= just shouldn=E2=80=99t preclude graceful service. Yes, the current ISP pra= ctices fall short. Can we help them improve their service?

Am I asking too much?

G= ene
----------------------------------------------
Eugene Chang
=
IEEE Life Senior Member



<= /div>

On Apr 30, 2024, at 9:31 AM, Colin_= Higbie via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> = wrote:

Gene,

I think the lion's share of othe= r people (many brilliant people here) on this thread are focused on keeping= latency down when under load. I generally just read and don't contribu= te on those discussions, because that's not my area of expertise. I onl= y posted my point on bandwidth, not to detract from the importance of reduc= ing latency, but to correct what I believed to be an important error on min= imum bandwidth required to be able to perform standard Internet functions. =

To my surprise, there was pushback on the figure, so I've respo= nded to try to educate this group on streaming usage in the hope that the p= eople working on the latency problem under load (core reason for this group= to exist) can also be aware of the minimum bandwidth needs to ensure they = don't plan based on bad assumptions.

For a single user, minimum = bandwidth (independent of latency) needs to be at least 25Mbps assuming the= goal is to provide access to all standard Internet services. Anything shor= t of that will deny users access to the primary streaming services, and mor= e specifically won't be able to watch 4K HDR video, which is the market= standard for streaming services today and likely will remain at that level= for the next several years.

I think it's fine to offer lower-co= st options that don't deliver 4K HDR video (not everyone cares about th= at), but at least 25Mbps should be available to an Internet customer for an= y new Internet service rollout.

Cheers,
Colin


-----Ori= ginal Message-----
From: Starlink <starlink-bounc= es@lists.bufferbloat.net> On Behalf Of starlink-= request@lists.bufferbloat.net
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 3:05 PM<= br>To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Starlink = Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15


---------------------------------------= -------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024= 09:04:43 -1000
From: Eugene Y Chang <eugene.chang@ieee.org>= ;
To: Colin_Higbie <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>, Dave Taht via Sta= rlink
<starl= ink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s t= he Latency, FCC
Message-ID: <438B1BC4-D465= -497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; chars= et=3D"utf-8"

I am always surprised how complicated these d= iscussions become. (Surprised mostly because I forgot the kind of issues th= is community care about.) The discussion doesn=E2=80=99t shed light on the = following scenarios.

While watching stream content, activating contr= ols needed to switch content sometimes (often?) have long pauses. I attribu= te that to buffer bloat and high latency.

With a happy household use= r watching streaming media, a second user could have terrible shopping expe= rience 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 gracef= ul performance to both persons in a household?
Is seeking graceful perfo= rmance too complicated to improve?
(I said =E2=80=9Cgraceful=E2=80=9D to= allow technical flexibility.)

Gene
-----------------------------= -----------------
Eugene Chang

__________________________________= _____________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.buffer= bloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listin= fo/starlink

_________= ______________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/sta= rlink
--000000000000028941061756c4ba--