From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw1-f176.google.com (mail-yw1-f176.google.com [209.85.128.176]) (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 3BB653B2A4 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2024 00:54:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yw1-f176.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-64d408a5d01so31621797b3.1 for ; Sun, 07 Jul 2024 21:54:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720414463; x=1721019263; 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=cU/T2PZZE9+QOAt7EHfI4mlapJ5/mmr/H4U+VaiM7S0=; b=TXUVi4OsiVvM9QOFBg7ZTyVjzHPtMiaWafMttBXzMm1xrZC23vufswKQPS/VTV4XZB VlC2kUZMchBER3EuX4aLVHLgTXvzZlCyLWTFwxnkeircnm2NbaHGv/xVSxTWED6YFlw7 XObnYLeeNzG49gG6rlQfyblrDLOP77T07yZGwEz62UiM3WJ18VHqLU4WbyRPFXvfaXn5 0UZyU+eWQ04ZVIVr2cpHW8RJE9C8KlYT11RSy50JfEtcfS+TEpfTrbs0qsw61bYeeJCU eDs7zWwgXkJVBQRFnX+Yem0AlK819BTk9SnY2A3U6jbRWM54DaNYg04RACbbmQwCbONK 7OEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxd93P0R5BDtZQX8mw3zGGaEeVd+y5WWG1vusIJs4DuwRc0GHix Zs6RRt//SbzIxzuuS4rYGYsavwNvhS+rmxsINXJCIUCNdOPnTzZI/jtEwXqIsqil3pBJevEzVAe SLbzSkjSWefNyWOEKo4MY0aq3l2pZUA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFyhBglxcpnxz1wRJt6mASsj+/PgeP77nLNY+VOD4VVrisrv4dHcBGZOHSdcjALqz6rIuaJHfLa2g7DEmbnO38= X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:7487:b0:651:a00f:698a with SMTP id 00721157ae682-652d8037751mr126451867b3.38.1720414463626; Sun, 07 Jul 2024 21:54:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: J Pan Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2024 21:54:12 -0700 Message-ID: To: Ulrich Speidel Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Starlink] A year of Starlink latency and loss metrics 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, 08 Jul 2024 04:54:24 -0000 starlink has made great improvements for bent pipes (both the user dish and landing ground station are seen by the same satellite) but they still need to improve for inter-satellite links, which is an even harder problem. how's the starlink performance in kiribati using isl links? -- J Pan, UVic CSc, ECS566, 250-472-5796 (NO VM), Pan@UVic.CA, Web.UVic.CA/~pa= n On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 8:17=E2=80=AFPM Ulrich Speidel via Starlink wrote: > > On 12/06/2024 4:32 pm, Tristan Horn via Starlink wrote: > > Not my metrics, but spotted this on Reddit and I'm always a sucker for Gr= afana graphs: > > https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/1dd4wjs/i_collected_metrics_on= _my_starlink_for_nearly_a/ > > I probably have little relevant to add (I returned my Starlink terminal i= n 2023), but the thread inspired me to get some stats going again myself (u= sing the same ping_exporter). I used to even collect minutely traceroutes = and single-stream TCP throughput ... I've gotten soft, I guess. > > The first thing I noticed looking at that graph was that the average late= ncy has been declining over time, with only two discernible "steps". That t= ells me two things: > > Steps are generally the consequence of an event. For Starlink, this could= be introduction of (different) AQM resulting in lower queue sojourn times.= Or it could be different routing / scheduling that results in lower physic= al path latencies as a result of better paths being chosen. > Gradual decline over time is likely to be the result of a longer-term cha= nge process. For Starlink, there are two longer term trends that come to mi= nd: customer numbers and satellite capacity. I'd be inclined to suspect the= latter is to "blame" for the gradual decline component here. If your Dishy= sees more satellites now than a year ago, there's a higher probability tha= t it'll get to talk to a satellite that's closer to both you and the respec= tive gateway. You'd also expect stdev to decline in the case, which again i= s what we see here. > > Minimal latency will happen pretty much when the "Starlinks align" to giv= e your ping empty queues with a satellite in near-optimal position to your = gateway. Again not surprising that we don't see much of a drop here. > > -- > > **************************************************************** > Dr. Ulrich Speidel > > School of Computer Science > > Room 303S.594 (City Campus) > > The University of Auckland > u.speidel@auckland.ac.nz > http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/ > **************************************************************** > > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink