Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad.
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Inemesit Affia <inemesitaffia@gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Main hurdles against the Integration of Satellites and Terrestial Networks
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 17:51:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJEhh73R-9hZ3_C6ause9GezdHKPMrvtmHeodoykN6fMZgqP6Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2d05e701-7556-8ae4-122c-e2f2d23feff2@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3520 bytes --]

With the existence of solutions like OpenMTCProuter, SDWAN, policy based
routing or any solution in general that allows combination in a sense of
any number of IP links, I really don't see a point for specific solutions.
Can anyone enlighten me?

For home users an issue may be IP blocks for certain services like Netflix
when the egress is out of a VPN or cloud provider richer than a residential
provider

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023, 2:57 PM Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink <
starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

>
> Le 30/08/2023 à 14:10, Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink a écrit :
> > Here is a report which summarizes the outcome of the last Satellites
> > conference
> > [
> https://www.microwavejournal.com/articles/39841-satellite-2023-summary-linking-up
> ]
> >
> > The report highlights the two main hurdles against the integration of
> > satellites and terrestrial networks: standardization and business model.
> >
> > "/Most of the pushback against closer integration of terrestrial
> > wireless and satellite networks revolved around standardization. This
> > may just be growing pains and it likely reflects the relative
> > positions of wireless and satellite along the maturity curve, but some
> > of the speakers were arguing against standardization. The basis of
> > this argument was that the mobile industry only understands standards,
> > but the satellite industry is currently differentiating based on
> > custom systems and capabilities. The feeling was that the satellite
> > industry had focused on technology and not regulations or standards
> > and changing that course would not be helpful to the industry in the
> > short term. Timing is important in this analysis because almost
> > everyone agreed that at some point, standardization would be a good
> > thing, but the concern was the best way to get to the point in the
> > future. The other interesting argument against closer integration
> > between wireless and satellite had to do with the business model.
> > Several speakers questioned where the customers would go as
> > terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks become more integrated. The
> > underlying issues seemed to include who is responsible for solving
> > network issues and perhaps more importantly, who recognizes the
> > revenue. These issues seem, perhaps a bit simplistically, to be
> > similar to early wireless roaming issues. While these issues created
> > turbulence in the wireless market, they were solved and that is
> > probably a template to address these challenges for the wireless and
> > satellite operators."/
> > /
> > /
> > Comments?
>
>
> It is an interesting report.
>
> For standardisation standpoint, it seems SDOs do push towards
> integration of 5G/6G and satcom; there are strong initiatives at least
> at 3GPP (NTN WI proposals) and IETF (TVR WG) in that direction.  But
> these are SDOs traditionally oriented to land communications, rather
> than space satcom.
>
> I wonder whether space satcom traditional SDOs (which ones?) have
> initiated work towards integration with 5G/6G and other land-based
> Internet?
>
> Alex
>
> >
> > Hesham
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4639 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2023-08-30 16:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-30 12:10 Hesham ElBakoury
2023-08-30 13:57 ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-08-30 16:51   ` Inemesit Affia [this message]
2023-08-30 19:35     ` David Lang
2023-09-01 16:27       ` Inemesit Affia
2023-09-15 11:29         ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-15 15:18           ` Ulrich Speidel
2023-09-15 17:52             ` David Lang
2023-09-15 23:32               ` Ulrich Speidel
2023-09-17 17:21                 ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-17 19:58                   ` David Lang
2023-09-18 23:32                     ` Hesham ElBakoury
2023-09-19  0:31                       ` David Lang
2023-09-19  0:36                         ` Hesham ElBakoury
2023-09-19  1:01                           ` David Lang
2023-09-19  1:08                             ` [Starlink] [Sat-int] " Jorge Amodio
2023-09-19  1:25                               ` David Lang
2023-09-21  7:58                               ` emile.stephan
2023-09-21 12:37                               ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-19 13:44                           ` [Starlink] " Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-19 14:36                             ` David Lang
2023-09-19 13:35                       ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-19 14:44                         ` David Lang
2023-09-17 17:12               ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-17 17:09             ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-17 18:06               ` Steve Stroh
2023-08-31  8:44     ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-08-31 11:39       ` David Lang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-10-16 13:26 David Fernández
2023-10-18 15:04 ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-19 14:55 David Fernández
2023-09-19 15:15 ` David Lang
2023-09-20  8:09   ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-09-20  8:32     ` David Lang
2023-09-03  1:03 David Fernández
2023-09-03  3:44 ` Mike Puchol
2023-09-15 11:35 ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-08-31 16:12 David Fernández
2023-08-31 15:51 David Fernández
2023-08-30 12:02 Hesham ElBakoury

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=CAJEhh73R-9hZ3_C6ause9GezdHKPMrvtmHeodoykN6fMZgqP6Q@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=inemesitaffia@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com \
    --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