I long for an update from mark. It was a great simulation. I would love to see it use the known downlink data we are seeing nowadays, and to see it calculate best case paths. As for BARD and chatgpt: Chatgpt said I had died in 2020, "leaving behind a substantial body of work. Bard has me presiding over Magareatha. It would be funnier, I suppose, if my grip on reality was weaker, or I was less unsure I really was living in a simulation. On Sat, Sep 23, 2023 at 2:55 PM Larry Press via Starlink wrote: > > In his first Starlink simulation, Mark Hadley assumed five transponders per satellite -- Two in-plane, two adjacent, and one crossing: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3479tkagiNo&list=PLrRMhEONgz06oMXQOljB5BoZxZw6cShLN&index=3 > > In his next Starlink simulation, Mark Hadley assumed four: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEIUdMiColU&list=PLrRMhEONgz06oMXQOljB5BoZxZw6cShLN&index=2 > > I guess he assumed the relative velocities were too high for the crossing connection. > > I asked Bard "How many laser transponders are in a second-generation Starlink satellite?" and it said "four." > I asked ChatGPT "How many laser transponders are in a second-generation Starlink satellite?" and it said it did not know. > I asked Bard again and the second time it said it did not know. > When I pointed out that it had told me "four" the first time I asked, Bard apologized for its previous answer. > > I remain an "AI" skeptic: > https://circleid.com/posts/20230721-google-bard-fails-to-answer-satellite-internet-questions > > From: Starlink on behalf of David Lang via Starlink > Sent: Friday, September 22, 2023 1:41 AM > To: Alexandre Petrescu > Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > Subject: Re: [Starlink] APNIC56 last week > > I believe that I read that STarlink has 5 lasers per sat. but whatever the > number, it's a tiny number compared to the number of satellites that they have > up there. > > As you are looking at 'trains', check their altitude. They aren't going to > shuffle sats around much, it's expensive in terms of fuel and they are only > allowed to provide service when they are in their proper orbits. > > We know the lasers are in operation as they are providing service to places more > than one sat hop away from ground stations. We also know they have a lot of > ground stations around to share the load. > > We have almost no details on the specific modules they are using, and none on > what routing they are using. > > David Lang > > > On Fri, 22 Sep 2023, > Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink wrote: > > > Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 10:26:26 +0200 > > From: Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink > > Reply-To: Alexandre Petrescu > > To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > > Subject: Re: [Starlink] APNIC56 last week > > > > > > Le 21/09/2023 à 21:05, Inemesit Affia via Starlink a écrit : > >> Not going to go into details but lasers have been identified in photos > >> of the sats and one of the component suppliers is known. (The scale is > >> novel, not the tech, demisabiliy is new though) > > > > 4 or 2 lasers on each sat (N-S, E-W) is potentially a very different > > matter from an IP routing standpoint. It still is a reduced set of > > variables, for a routing protocol (it is not like there being an > > arbitrary number of IP interfaces, it's just 2 or 4). > > > > For component manufacturers: yes, I heard about a few manufacturers of > > such equipment for laser comms for LEO sats, experimented. There is > > public information about a few of them. I dont know which is considered > > by starlink, but there is not my worry. There is also a difference > > between laser links between sats on different orbit altitudes (e.g. > > laser for ISL for GEO to MEO) and lasers between sats on a same orbit > > altitude, or on a same orbit. It's three different things, with > > different sets of requirements: focusing, power levels, distance ranges. > > > > At the lowest limit (cheapest, less powerful, less range distance), I > > suppose it is possible to use simply LiFi optical links (a sort of WiFi > > but with light). If so, then it is very easy to have IP on it. > > > > There is also an 'optical' spec that was circulated here on this list > > (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sda.mil/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/SDA-OCT-Standard-v3.0.pdf__;!!P7nkOOY!pso4rogBStK7jR7pEg21ACCfJyL_ZCltZip5K7pxmJhmaSKfOY1RgwXzW4EtPOvEhS9XoLRaKS8QbVoEgYhXDWmzfQ$ ), > > although it seemed to me to figure on kepler's website, not on > > starlink's. In that spec, it is said Ethernet, among other things. On > > Ethernet, IP can run easily. > > > >> > >> Starlink can't deliver to Antarctica or Northern parts of Alaska, > >> Ascension Island, Diego Garcia, Easter Island, Vanuatu, Iran without > >> ISL's etc > > > > I'll have to look where these places are. > > > > When looking at starlink satellites I often see trains forming and > > lasting for a while. Someone said these sats are like that (trains) > > prior to be put on a more evenly distanced, in-orbit; but some time > > passed, and they continue this kind of behaviour: form denser trains, > > then distance more evenly, and back again. So I am not sure these > > 'trains' are ephemeral. They seem to be in such 'train' structure while > > above some particular continents or areas, but not sure. It takes a lot > > of time to make a meaning of it. > > > > Also, now here are at least two kinds of starlink subscription plans: > > 40EUR/month and 287EUR/month, for fixed vs mobile. > > > >> > >> North South links seem to work but not East West (if they exist) > > > > Yes, good question. It makes a lot of difference whether there are 2 or > > 4 laser links on each sat. It also makes a lot of difference if trying > > to make IP routing work there (assuming there could be 2 or 4 IP > > interfaces for lasers). > > > > This (number of ISL links on a starlink sat) can have an impact on how > > people show LEO satellite topologies in Internet Drafts at IETF. > > > > Alex > > > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023, 2:20 PM Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Le 19/09/2023 à 06:39, Ulrich Speidel via Starlink a écrit : > >> > FWIW, I gave a talk about Starlink - insights from a year in - > >> at last > >> > week's APNIC56 conference in Kyoto: > >> > > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://conference.apnic.net/56/program/program/*/day/6/technical-2/__;Iw!!P7nkOOY!pso4rogBStK7jR7pEg21ACCfJyL_ZCltZip5K7pxmJhmaSKfOY1RgwXzW4EtPOvEhS9XoLRaKS8QbVoEgYjUChNXHQ$ > >> > >> > >> Thanks for the presentation. > >> > >> I would like to ask what do you mean by "Method #2: "space > >> lasers""and > >> "Not all Starlink satellites have > >> lasers" on slide 5? > >> > >> It seems to be saying there is inter-satellite communications. The > >> need > >> of that seems to stem from the lack of ground 'teleport' that is > >> necessary for DISHY-SAT-Internet communications, so a SAT-to-SAT > >> communication is apparently used with lasers. I can agree with > >> the need. > >> > >> What standard is used for these lasers? > >> > >> Is this ISL communicaiton within the starlink constellation a > >> supposition or a sure thing? > >> > >> Other presentations of starlink mentioned on this list dont talk > >> about > >> this lasers between sats (dont show lasers on the sats), but kepler > >> talks about optical links, and also there is talk about ISOC LEO > >> Internet about such 'lasers from space'. > >> > >> (I must say that I thought previously that there were only 2 or 3 > >> ground > >> teleports overall in EU and USA, but I see now there is a teleport > >> in NZ > >> too). > >> > >> (for price comparison: it is said 100USD monthly, but in France right > >> now the monthly subscription is at around 40 Euros; this competes > >> very > >> advantageously to other satcoms ISPs for rural areas non-covered > >> by 5G; > >> the cellular monthly subscriptions are still much more advantageous, > >> where there is 5G, of course). > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> > > >> > Also well worth looking at is Geoff Huston's excellent piece on the > >> > foreseeable demise of TCP in favour of QUIC in the same session. > >> One > >> > of Geoff's main arguments is that the Internet is becoming local, > >> > i.e., most traffic goes between a CDN server and you, and most > >> data is > >> > becoming proprietary to the application owner, meaning it suits the > >> > Googles and Facebooks of this world very well not to be using > >> TCP for > >> > its transport, but rather pull the transport specifics into the > >> > application layer where the have full control. > >> > > >> > Food for thought, especially since LEO networks are a > >> particularly bad > >> > place to put local content caches, since the concept of what's > >> "local" > >> > in a LEO network changes constantly, at around 20,000 miles an > >> hour or > >> > so. Spoke to a Rwandan colleague who installs Starlink there and > >> sees > >> > all traffic to anywhere go via the US with RTTs of nearly 2 > >> seconds, > >> > even if the Rwandan user is trying to access a Rwandan service. > >> > > >> > About to hop onto a plane (ZK-NZJ) tonight with free WiFi (Ka band > >> > GEO) enroute to Auckland in the hope of getting a better experience > >> > than last time when the system seemed to run out of IP addresses on > >> > its DHCP. > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Starlink mailing list > >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink__;!!P7nkOOY!pso4rogBStK7jR7pEg21ACCfJyL_ZCltZip5K7pxmJhmaSKfOY1RgwXzW4EtPOvEhS9XoLRaKS8QbVoEgYgJ4na9hA$ > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Starlink mailing list > >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink__;!!P7nkOOY!pso4rogBStK7jR7pEg21ACCfJyL_ZCltZip5K7pxmJhmaSKfOY1RgwXzW4EtPOvEhS9XoLRaKS8QbVoEgYgJ4na9hA$ > > _______________________________________________ > > Starlink mailing list > > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink__;!!P7nkOOY!pso4rogBStK7jR7pEg21ACCfJyL_ZCltZip5K7pxmJhmaSKfOY1RgwXzW4EtPOvEhS9XoLRaKS8QbVoEgYgJ4na9hA$ > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink -- Oct 30: https://netdevconf.info/0x17/news/the-maestro-and-the-music-bof.html Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos