From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com (mail-pl1-x62d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) (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 BDD0D3CB43 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 16:40:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id y4so10997782plb.2 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 13:40:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=+CTBlPM+cbUZmZc7zDQKEQXY062xCqqFRoHWIpTSpiY=; b=o43n2Kj0lWTZiziTrGJDzvruX6d86JOxLdOBVeeZxNRQj2r0aNuuFoKQbqMrYsE8d4 WD+h8MKeLLUgsghIkOMDgTSCZPn1aHYmFNsmGae1rylvj2GmI2JypA3/6M1cI+OM8/XZ 7IG8QduvjYdSxpPITrXK9MBt1oYzdDvGt4A3kiVf8wYJCR4mhTmQebvIGeH5aFTJScXl X77SQI933dgOvtoYvW9KZPV22hTbtrDPgEA1esNM6bhhnarFiMu310ZEyQUtv48mtvqI YoRgA3c1V3J8HiECPSrnbDfkYkE32tdKduqMhKPunnxvt42c456RrMhwzAkxJyhEG6Wk nf/A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=+CTBlPM+cbUZmZc7zDQKEQXY062xCqqFRoHWIpTSpiY=; b=Sdl92zLjDJS6PRNzKhzazezeoGLDW9rou6GtAJw3anFTb+PyQoOkosr50Pr+k998B5 IYTA19rRcTQ/zkW385w5NJbT6QRL6yEfmIMacQALLDNYhket4VTQonIV7bgNyXAKbP0S lnsPKOoSJXErNZ8a3DHDI99x+WN1ppE2gOKy8BNxEeUb+gnv9cbtaJn9Cz/MUvhi/Pdp 5K2JzpW+0fX1c3HWRP7W7+bxRgtP3wCI/5cml2ADf8IbeG1hrAEwmCSTwoH9rD+67Vx+ SSuF0yjf2oIMlxvAZMCmQFZ8i4hlNum+l5NBsT2ZVtMjHRNIblzD/fR+kSB+TRZkGWj4 2XIA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo3/PLTPMk8YIW0XFgeJmd6wQPCi2igEqNs3D3IQDdNg4x0f5aTK GhD5Ev/eHxzkZwXWi8cbNFBB5u+xJuLfZ+Fgm7hEJ7c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5M6YsS8eukDBRYGMQvGVAKJqhWneiwXkD+TquCeXYNc6dS6Z2QknZLJdJmZLnE5CHop7uMYia1jzbISIm7O1w= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3b90:b0:1fb:3d53:639 with SMTP id pc16-20020a17090b3b9000b001fb3d530639mr131730pjb.156.1661200845773; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 13:40:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: warren ponder Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 13:40:36 -0700 Message-ID: To: David Lang Cc: Daniel AJ Sokolov , Benjamin Henrion via Starlink Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000050208805e6da769f" Subject: Re: [Starlink] No RDOF-Funds for Starlink 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, 22 Aug 2022 20:40:46 -0000 --00000000000050208805e6da769f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The FCC public announcement doc has more detail than the FCC press release. It details the upfront cost as you recall as a factor. It also highlights that SpaceX simply would not respond to questions for clarification regarding details of the required long for regarding performance details, design details and how they would address their concerns ( Likely some came from this study) Performance was also raised as was the concern of it being emerging technology. WP On Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 1:28 PM David Lang via Starlink < starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > I thought I had read that they were upset over the $500 up front cost of > starlink more than anything else. > > David Lang > > On Mon, 22 Aug 2022, Daniel AJ Sokolov via Starlink wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 12:47:33 -0700 > > From: Daniel AJ Sokolov via Starlink > > Reply-To: Daniel AJ Sokolov > > To: Benjamin Henrion via Starlink > > Subject: [Starlink] No RDOF-Funds for Starlink > > > > Hello, > > > > Starlink was posed to receive 900 million USD from the FCC's Rural > > Digital Opportunity Fund to bring broadband internet to unserviced area= s > > of the United States - until it wasn't. > > > > Earlier this month, the FCC decided NOT to give Starlink any of the 900 > > million dollars after all. > > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-22-848A1.pdf > > > > "The Bureau has determined that, based on the totality of the long-form > > applications, the expansive service areas reflected in their winning > > bids, and their inadequate responses to the Bureau=E2=80=99s follow-up > > questions, LTD and Starlink are not reasonably capable of complying wit= h > > the Commission=E2=80=99s requirements. The Commission has an obligation= to > > protect our limited Universal Service Funds and to avoid extensive > > delays in providing needed service to rural areas, including by avoidin= g > > subsidizing risky proposals that promise faster speeds than they can > > deliver, and/or propose deployment plans that are not realistic or that > > are predicated on aggressive assumptions and predictions. We observe > > that Ookla data reported as of July 31, 2022 indicate that Starlink=E2= =80=99s > > speeds have been declining from the last quarter of 2021 to the second > > quarter of 2022, including upload speeds that are falling well below 20 > > Mbps. Accordingly, we deny LTD=E2=80=99s and Starlink=E2=80=99s long-fo= rm applications, > > and both are in default on all winning bids (...)" > > > > (For purposes of Starlink, you can ignore the parts about LTD Broadband= .) > > > > Also note this 2021 study showing Starlink's impending capacity crunch: > > > > We forecast a capacity shortfall in 2028: > > - 56% of RDOF subscribers are congested in a forecasted > > low demand scenario > > - More locations will be impacted if RDOF usage is higher, > > or SpaceX launches fewer satellites by 2028 > > . RDOF service could be significantly worse if Starlink > > capacity is allocated to non-RDOF use cases > > > > > https://www.ntca.org/sites/default/files/documents/2021-02/FBA_LEO_RDOF_A= ssessment_Final_Report_20210208.pdf > > > > > > FYI > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > --00000000000050208805e6da769f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The FCC public announcement doc has more detail than the = FCC press=C2=A0release.

It det= ails the upfront cost as you recall as a factor. It also highlights that Sp= aceX simply would not respond to questions for clarification regarding deta= ils of the required long for regarding performance details, design details = and how they would address their concerns ( Likely some came from this stud= y)=C2=A0

Performance was= also raised as was the concern of it being emerging technology.

WP

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 1:28= PM David Lang via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
I thought I had read that they were upset over the $500 u= p front cost of
starlink more than anything else.

David Lang

On Mon, 22 Aug 2022, Daniel AJ Sokolov via Starlink wrote:

> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 12:47:33 -0700
> From: Daniel AJ Sokolov via Starlink <starlink@lists.bu= fferbloat.net>
> Reply-To: Daniel AJ Sokolov <daniel@falco.ca>
> To: Benjamin Henrion via Starlink <starlink@lists.buffe= rbloat.net>
> Subject: [Starlink] No RDOF-Funds for Starlink
>
> Hello,
>
> Starlink was posed to receive 900 million USD from the FCC's Rural=
> Digital Opportunity Fund to bring broadband internet to unserviced are= as
> of the United States - until it wasn't.
>
> Earlier this month, the FCC decided NOT to give Starlink any of the 90= 0
> million dollars after all.
> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/a= ttachments/DA-22-848A1.pdf
>
> "The Bureau has determined that, based on the totality of the lon= g-form
> applications, the expansive service areas reflected in their winning <= br> > bids, and their inadequate responses to the Bureau=E2=80=99s follow-up=
> questions, LTD and Starlink are not reasonably capable of complying wi= th
> the Commission=E2=80=99s requirements. The Commission has an obligatio= n to
> protect our limited Universal Service Funds and to avoid extensive > delays in providing needed service to rural areas, including by avoidi= ng
> subsidizing risky proposals that promise faster speeds than they can <= br> > deliver, and/or propose deployment plans that are not realistic or tha= t
> are predicated on aggressive assumptions and predictions. We observe > that Ookla data reported as of July 31, 2022 indicate that Starlink=E2= =80=99s
> speeds have been declining from the last quarter of 2021 to the second=
> quarter of 2022, including upload speeds that are falling well below 2= 0
> Mbps. Accordingly, we deny LTD=E2=80=99s and Starlink=E2=80=99s long-f= orm applications,
> and both are in default on all winning bids (...)"
>
> (For purposes of Starlink, you can ignore the parts about LTD Broadban= d.)
>
> Also note this 2021 study showing Starlink's impending capacity cr= unch:
>
> We forecast a capacity shortfall in 2028:
> - 56% of RDOF subscribers are congested in a forecasted
> low demand scenario
> - More locations will be impacted if RDOF usage is higher,
> or SpaceX launches fewer satellites by 2028
> . RDOF service could be significantly worse if Starlink
> capacity is allocated to non-RDOF use cases
>
> https://www.ntca.org/sites/default/files/documents/= 2021-02/FBA_LEO_RDOF_Assessment_Final_Report_20210208.pdf
>
>
> FYI
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinf= o/starlink
>_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/sta= rlink
--00000000000050208805e6da769f--