Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad.
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: dan <dandenson@gmail.com>
To: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>
Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>,
	 Dave Taht via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
	Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
	 libreqos <libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
	bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] [LibreQoS] [Bloat] [Rpm] net neutrality back in the news
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 09:53:26 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA_JP8X0dRJJm5vAxccvWjbqqL5hAdk=BHE9pf8k==0CDsAHnQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C8F178A-BDC9-4D7E-84BD-DFE7231E8740@cable.comcast.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2563 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 7:17 AM Livingood, Jason via LibreQoS <
libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> On 9/29/23, 00:54, "Jonathan Morton" <chromatix99@gmail.com <mailto:
> chromatix99@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > Some ISPs began to actively degrade Netflix traffic, in particular by
> refusing to provision adequate peering capacity at the nodes through which
> Netflix traffic predominated
>
> That is not true and really not worth re-litigating here.
>
> > NN regulations forced ISPs to carry Netflix traffic with reasonable
> levels of service, even though they didn't want to for purely selfish and
> greedy commercial reasons.
>
> NN regulations played no role whatsoever in the resolution of that
> conflict - a business arrangement was reached, just as it was in the SK
> Telecom example recently:
> https://about.netflix.com/en/news/sk-telecom-sk-broadband-and-netflix-establish-strategic-partnership-to
>
> > ISPs behind L4S actively do not want a technology that works end-to-end
> over the general Internet.
>
> That's simply not true. As someone running an L4S field trial right now -
> we want the technology to get the widest possible deployment and be fully
> end-to-end. Why else would there be so much effort to ensure that ECN and
> DSCP marks can traverse network domain boundaries for example? Why else
> would there be strong app developer interest? What evidence do you have to
> show that anyone working on L4S want to create a walled garden? If
> anything, it seems the opposite of 5G network slicing, which seems to me
> personally to be another 3GPP run at walled garden stuff (like IMS).
> Ultimately it is like a lot of other IETF work -- it is an interesting
> technology and we'll have to see whether it gets good adoption - the
> 'market' will decide.
>
> > They want something that can provide a domination service within their
> own walled gardens.
>
> Also not correct. And last time I checked the balance sheets of companies
> in these sectors - video streaming services were losing money while
> provision of internet services were financially healthy.
>
> JL
>
>
>
I think this stuff degrades into conspiracy theory often enough.  While I
don't discount the possibility of collusion, I don't give these
people/groups credit enough to pull of a mass scale conspiracy either....
If netflix is jammed down to small of a pipe at an ISP, that's more likely
(IMO...) disorganization or incompetence or disinterest over conspiracy.
 I feel the same about government in general...

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3210 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-29 15:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-29 13:16 [Starlink] [Bloat] [LibreQoS] " Livingood, Jason
2023-09-29 15:53 ` dan [this message]
2023-09-30 11:41   ` [Starlink] [Rpm] [LibreQoS] [Bloat] " Frantisek Borsik
2023-09-29 16:22 [Starlink] [LibreQoS] [Bloat] [Rpm] " David Fernández
2023-09-29 16:26 ` Sebastian Moeller

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='CAA_JP8X0dRJJm5vAxccvWjbqqL5hAdk=BHE9pf8k==0CDsAHnQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=dandenson@gmail.com \
    --cc=Jason_Livingood@comcast.com \
    --cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
    --cc=libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --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