From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-x32a.google.com (mail-wm1-x32a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32a]) (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 BCA813B2A4 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 14:53:51 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-41241f64c6bso27363625e9.0 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:53:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1708977229; x=1709582029; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=x5nHJ9xFbPKHSA2YbOoZD0lpzFpyyCgeKdTBzKguZVs=; b=KZ3S0nlrF4pNH5cIsF5oEu8TIPncHcKWzSJq9+rquWs5O3j5+hGck6RnUR3p03KXMW 1h4T+xXTxaPteIoATjNb/Xt2iexfMu+tShSFduqxEPJI2vbPaX7EI8ntb05c34rxBiTO RuwYAVRJIhIR7NdkSa26TDBXMDJuOXvQ5K6FC3kSXcDQtQ9GAu4/go4wthuKGc7+obyF b/IwsadAghErKJs/gEmCQESw4cyeyIpHEIj4+Y4vf9TkTUfIeR4QSZPqLQW/a5Bh6unq BcDuS5CfC2bIg6D0mI87Jm8MZ6oXj9du/9nv5Apgf1ahxprkwhC8qUTOChPq/CVMFajN U1gw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1708977229; x=1709582029; h=content-transfer-encoding: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=x5nHJ9xFbPKHSA2YbOoZD0lpzFpyyCgeKdTBzKguZVs=; b=oxpZ9DD4EV5YUlNkR6Vx78DcUmDlY5jtZ/tI+eAvPuOi7mY8KoO0XUIKGgyljUOnVF +1qoG6iOZ27XIhdOT/9RTcq4Q6McandUpoSF+TEni2LVq/txXFoKeaXaR1fxJE/Fa15l i9UXNZ3cB/vJgEAfqADac6H4sSkC2M4YpPoLTswNf5azfGizRpGRRA103b67wtuQNOOx bqp1P9CrdkOMEFazCqZqjTBSW3nWGy/7gxF4byhwg9LYEPrLBk0dWrs9ZXj/9LMx3xSn tvRaI72zWiXQlLSDHbhlvJIIR/BdCOMjF55jzQWvKIT/CRvLSUW4aSYhPmhobDRzZ2G9 j83A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx0U466zRt1atnRR0QY768uvT7Qygm58GKiZAs2gzmI+RZixeIp zx/K6sATL8okaM8jg3CfVK/0rsZIK50bHQcKsFIHPldMgvZVA6ctM9QHkPd23yBhOzP9qgtmx+r CbR5EtGbreyby+18CefMnWH5vNu1JjdMiX3I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFvwl8i032tAwT/b5NPoCpTbBO2zetQsTZvbCo+dBII8rPPCU99zSjajdbPHDOxOCYuvDjzXKQqm+beaYFQwX8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4513:b0:412:6c5f:d971 with SMTP id t19-20020a05600c451300b004126c5fd971mr6241368wmo.11.1708977228834; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:53:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 14:53:37 -0500 Message-ID: To: Nitinder Mohan Cc: "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Starlink] Comprehensive Measurement Study on Starlink Performance Published 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: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:53:51 -0000 While nobody reads footnotes much, and I would really like you to cite this as the instigator of a lot of research into this area, also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dc9gLo6Xrwgw because of all that rage and frustration is what keyed off 3 years of effort. Think of it as newton noticed an apple, falling from a tree. This is also a good cite, in terms of flavoring your methods to a level that I can tolerate. https://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/2014/doc/slides/137.pdf I will go through more of the footnotes when I have time, starting with the first. It is also plausible that Starlink employs active queue management (AQM) techniques [1] to moderate uplink latencies under congestion. Um... it does not look like it to my eye. Just a overly short packet FIFO. I haven=C2=B4t torn it apart lately however. You can easily tell the difference in packet loss behaviors by tearing apart rrul packet captures. On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 1:13=E2=80=AFPM Nitinder Mohan via Starlink wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Our comprehensive multifaceted measurement study looking at Starlink glob= al and last-mile performance is now available online: https://arxiv.org/abs= /2310.09242. > > TL;DR: See the summary in this nice teaser video we made: https://youtu.b= e/WtE3MoK8J80 > > We looked at several third-party measurement sources (M-Lab, RIPE Atlas) = and performed our own measurements over multiple Starlink dishes to uncover= the following: > > 1. How different is Starlink network performance globally? How do ground = station and PoP availability impact performance? > 2. How much latency is consumed by the satellite part of the link? > 3. Is Starlink connection affected by bufferbloat? > 4. Are satellite handovers the root-cause of Starlink 15-sec reconfigurat= ions? > 5. How good is Starlink compared to terrestrial cellular networks for rea= l-time applications, specifically Cloud Gaming and Zoom. > > The study has been accepted and will appear in ACM The Web Conference 202= 4 (WWW), which is a flagship venue that has historically housed several pio= neering works central to Internet success. > > Feel free to let me know if you have any questions related to the work. > > P.S. We also thanked this mailing list in our paper for providing us seve= ral key insights and inquisitive discussions :) > > Thanks and Regards > > Nitinder Mohan > Technical University Munich (TUM) > https://www.nitindermohan.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink --=20 https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/2024_predictions/ Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos