From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x429.google.com (mail-pf1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::429]) (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 85FCA3B29D; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:36:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x429.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6edb76d83d0so5411749b3a.0; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:36:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1714512967; x=1715117767; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ipVoIlaliGe+/RANDR3nXlyUu6L6uVHXnBxvVzckt9M=; b=TEI1VHEl1i4ej5QVOq5+/FRdiUKgIH1p+0HQqHqcr8aNX62wDdOTcHBJFwRRgjcDvb GbTkYahWEjcwmld5eOA7mQ3uq6dmYZMblGPA+9okAviLsS3lX6s6Ss5i0PcqKmwi9fGV 39/oUIYuMkVv5YbXhG0oRMEbMus7uIfq2flFkro+ExBcTZNqWrU/hnfHz0fisW/wjODx nUaXZXXIHcVGHtAnpgld7eu/QIMugPNT4+0NsCmQ5OjmHsbJv7A25lFfe9/at6tgc/o+ /sr8cR8ZGUK0+/HH+i2X+Scac8x/TXGsp3IbltnBi0YvW8PbNxsqntyuHOxGaCmKqTvR Dhvg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1714512967; x=1715117767; h=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=ipVoIlaliGe+/RANDR3nXlyUu6L6uVHXnBxvVzckt9M=; b=UWc/3obhgwcDJhkjUdk9lUWc92BpOXxEUvjOHCwlCSLzMJ/skxifoXCBlyKEVFlSW9 J8Z6rKyt23ubEHi6vtPQItb6TlshJ22GlKj0DgerB5+ahIlHCATgZ+tNkYbbBKStDLMV beU5UCZkixQ7YRiQMESWO1vIxQ+SE4zrI2bTffAZCQo0HtiuVV+IKd5Xls3jR6BzhjQX Rh5PPBEmjiBqdpjCiJsyJtNdNES9hcAicZZurVbnIy59PyJPhmcFxUz5Kh8Z3wqNaw44 P9lxD+Rrvv8oStz9Yq1PaBx90gNyj7DtIAEb1x9wBVXfxZIjuHHi/Cs3i8tqsMsYZWnU lFrw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWqcNNoHUdsuGgUhEmaP5Lu1EyWIPT/jvyaWkY5EKjcpommoJDwhkrShMeXIuWNvM8JQU4zYypLlNkww1CglXytdr2osqNWjZxZWXZflOJzykzm0m0D8+nVhA/wE/mhpUYE1AEa2IWTox8t+/nwjQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxo0lwOB7CcmgDaplnbjVqes4t2KbTO8Moh6EWKr1X/Rnclwb/M lZ+9krlmXk756L8tlaI5WNgIWknt3fuk3w3izrW2gCneBDeLh5L9kl9W2ZimBvK/XUG6frSoZzF rtpx7KzgGgcc2ZtNdYBIdGxNRmD8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHmLcAtNmDXt+HY+ZCKNZpyncaWmkcQKIrKb863luD8oyTFcbUv91DHDHVUXrdbG0l/DZ2HbbCJURTOt00KYtU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a21:2d06:b0:1ac:5bf6:ba47 with SMTP id tw6-20020a056a212d0600b001ac5bf6ba47mr1380649pzb.43.1714512967184; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:36:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1A972680-ECA5-42CA-BE8B-6BBD46FF5E74@ieee.org> In-Reply-To: From: Frantisek Borsik Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 23:35:30 +0200 Message-ID: To: Eugene Y Chang Cc: Dave Taht , Dave Taht via Starlink , Colin_Higbie , libreqos Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005f3adb0617572885" Subject: Re: [Starlink] =?utf-8?q?It=E2=80=99s_the_Latency=2C_FCC?= 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: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:36:08 -0000 --0000000000005f3adb0617572885 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Eugene - the easiest thing in the case of your ISP would be tell him about us: https://libreqos.io He can take a look on it, join our support chat and get help if he won't be able to get it up and running: https://chat.libreqos.io/join/fvu3cerayyaumo377xwvpev6/ But most of the ISPs don't need to talk with us at all, it's easy to deploy= . All the best, Frank Frantisek (Frank) Borsik https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 Skype: casioa5302ca frantisek.borsik@gmail.com On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:22=E2=80=AFPM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink < starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > OK. I need help teaching my ISPs that they can do this without threatenin= g > their business model. > Who can help me? > > A public demo? Yes! Are you saying that if our (my) neighborhood ISP > adopted the lessons from the public demo, most of the latency issues woul= d > be solved? What won=E2=80=99t get fixed? How do we make this a widely ado= pted best > practice? Am I crying over issues that are already fixed? Does this > simplify the issues at the FCC? > > Gene > ---------------------------------------------- > Eugene Chang > IEEE Life Senior Member > > > > > On Apr 30, 2024, at 11:07 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > > Just fq codel or cake everything and you get all that. > > Libreqos is free software for those that do not want to update their data > plane. Perhaps we should do a public demo of what it can do for every tec= h > on the planet. Dsl benefits, fiber does also (but it is the stats that > matter more on fiber because the customer wifi becomes bloated) > > Starlink merely fq codeled their wifi and did some aqm work (not codel I > think) to get the amazing results they are getting today. I don't have th= e > waveform test results handy but they are amazing. I feel a sea change in > the wind... > > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024, 12:51=E2=80=AFPM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink < > starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > >> Colin, >> I am overwhelmed with all the reasons that prevent low(er) or consistent >> latency. >> I think that our best ISP offerings should deliver graceful, agile, or >> nimble service. Sure, handle all the high-volume data. The high-volume >> service just shouldn=E2=80=99t preclude graceful service. Yes, the curre= nt ISP >> practices fall short. Can we help them improve their service? >> >> Am I asking too much? >> >> Gene >> ---------------------------------------------- >> Eugene Chang >> IEEE Life Senior Member >> >> >> >> >> On Apr 30, 2024, at 9:31 AM, Colin_Higbie via Starlink < >> starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: >> >> Gene, >> >> I think the lion's share of other people (many brilliant people here) on >> this thread are focused on keeping latency down when under load. I >> generally just read and don't contribute on those discussions, because >> that's not my area of expertise. I only posted my point on bandwidth, no= t >> to detract from the importance of reducing latency, but to correct what = I >> believed to be an important error on minimum bandwidth required to be ab= le >> to perform standard Internet functions. >> >> To my surprise, there was pushback on the figure, so I've responded to >> try to educate this group on streaming usage in the hope that the people >> working on the latency problem under load (core reason for this group to >> exist) can also be aware of the minimum bandwidth needs to ensure they >> don't plan based on bad assumptions. >> >> For a single user, minimum bandwidth (independent of latency) needs to b= e >> at least 25Mbps assuming the goal is to provide access to all standard >> Internet services. Anything short of that will deny users access to the >> primary streaming services, and more specifically won't be able to watch= 4K >> HDR video, which is the market standard for streaming services today and >> likely will remain at that level for the next several years. >> >> I think it's fine to offer lower-cost options that don't deliver 4K HDR >> video (not everyone cares about that), but at least 25Mbps should be >> available to an Internet customer for any new Internet service rollout. >> >> Cheers, >> Colin >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Starlink On Behalf Of >> starlink-request@lists.bufferbloat.net >> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 3:05 PM >> To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> Subject: Starlink Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15 >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:04:43 -1000 >> From: Eugene Y Chang >> To: Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink >> >> Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s the Latency, FCC >> Message-ID: <438B1BC4-D465-497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >> >> I am always surprised how complicated these discussions become. >> (Surprised mostly because I forgot the kind of issues this community car= e >> about.) The discussion doesn=E2=80=99t shed light on the following scena= rios. >> >> While watching stream content, activating controls needed to switch >> content sometimes (often?) have long pauses. I attribute that to buffer >> bloat and high latency. >> >> With a happy household user watching streaming media, a second user coul= d >> have terrible shopping experience with Amazon. The interactive response >> could be (is often) horrible. (Personally, I would be doing email and >> working on a shared doc. The Amazon analogy probably applies to more >> people.) >> >> How can we deliver graceful performance to both persons in a household? >> Is seeking graceful performance too complicated to improve? >> (I said =E2=80=9Cgraceful=E2=80=9D to allow technical flexibility.) >> >> Gene >> ---------------------------------------------- >> Eugene Chang >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > --0000000000005f3adb0617572885 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Eugene - the easiest thing in the case of your ISP would b= e tell him about us: https://libreqos.io


But most o= f the ISPs don't need to talk with us at all, it's easy to deploy.<= /div>


All the best,

Frank<= u>

Frantisek= (Frank) Borsik

=C2=A0

https://www.linkedin.com/in/fra= ntisekborsik

Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714=C2=A0

iMessage, mobile: +4= 20775230885

Skype: casioa5302ca

frantisek.borsik@gmail.com<= /p>

=


On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:22=E2=80=AFPM Eugene Y Chang via= Starlink <starlink@li= sts.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
OK. I need help teaching my ISPs that they ca= n do this without threatening their business model.
Who can help me?

A public demo? Yes! Are you saying that if our (my) = neighborhood ISP adopted the lessons from the public demo, most of the late= ncy issues would be solved? What won=E2=80=99t get fixed? How do we make th= is a widely adopted best practice? Am I crying over issues that are already= fixed? Does this simplify the issues at the FCC?
<= div dir=3D"auto" style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align= :start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:= 0px;text-decoration:none;line-break:after-white-space">

Gene
----------------------------------------------
Eugene Cha= ng
IEEE Life Senior Member




On Apr 30, 2024, at 11:07 AM, Dave = Taht <dave.taht= @gmail.com> wrote:

Just fq codel or = cake everything and you get all that.

Libreqos is free software for those that do not want to update th= eir data plane. Perhaps we should do a public demo of what it can do for ev= ery tech on the planet. Dsl benefits, fiber does also (but it is the stats = that matter more on fiber because the customer wifi becomes bloated)
<= div dir=3D"auto">
Starlink merely fq codeled the= ir wifi and did some aqm work (not codel I think) to get the amazing result= s they are getting today. I don't have the waveform test results handy = but they are amazing. I feel a sea change in the wind...



On Tue, Apr 30, 2024, 12:51=E2= =80=AFPM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wr= ote:
= Colin,
I am overwhelmed with all the reasons that prevent low(er) or co= nsistent latency.
I think that our best ISP offerings should deli= ver graceful, agile, or nimble service. Sure, handle all the high-volume da= ta. The high-volume service just shouldn=E2=80=99t preclude graceful servic= e. Yes, the current ISP practices fall short. Can we help them improve thei= r service?

Am I asking too much?

Gene
----------------------------------------------=
Eugene Chang
IEEE Life Senior Member




On Apr 30, 2024, at 9:31 AM, Colin_= Higbie via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> = wrote:

Gene,

I think the lion's share of othe= r people (many brilliant people here) on this thread are focused on keeping= latency down when under load. I generally just read and don't contribu= te on those discussions, because that's not my area of expertise. I onl= y posted my point on bandwidth, not to detract from the importance of reduc= ing latency, but to correct what I believed to be an important error on min= imum bandwidth required to be able to perform standard Internet functions. =

To my surprise, there was pushback on the figure, so I've respo= nded to try to educate this group on streaming usage in the hope that the p= eople working on the latency problem under load (core reason for this group= to exist) can also be aware of the minimum bandwidth needs to ensure they = don't plan based on bad assumptions.

For a single user, minimum = bandwidth (independent of latency) needs to be at least 25Mbps assuming the= goal is to provide access to all standard Internet services. Anything shor= t of that will deny users access to the primary streaming services, and mor= e specifically won't be able to watch 4K HDR video, which is the market= standard for streaming services today and likely will remain at that level= for the next several years.

I think it's fine to offer lower-co= st options that don't deliver 4K HDR video (not everyone cares about th= at), but at least 25Mbps should be available to an Internet customer for an= y new Internet service rollout.

Cheers,
Colin


-----Ori= ginal Message-----
From: Starlink <starlink-bounc= es@lists.bufferbloat.net> On Behalf Of starlink-= request@lists.bufferbloat.net
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 3:05 PM<= br>To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Starlink = Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15


---------------------------------------= -------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024= 09:04:43 -1000
From: Eugene Y Chang <eugene.chang@ieee.org>= ;
To: Colin_Higbie <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>, Dave Taht via Sta= rlink
<starl= ink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] It=E2=80=99s t= he Latency, FCC
Message-ID: <438B1BC4-D465= -497A-B6BA-700E1D411036@ieee.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; chars= et=3D"utf-8"

I am always surprised how complicated these d= iscussions become. (Surprised mostly because I forgot the kind of issues th= is community care about.) The discussion doesn=E2=80=99t shed light on the = following scenarios.

While watching stream content, activating contr= ols needed to switch content sometimes (often?) have long pauses. I attribu= te that to buffer bloat and high latency.

With a happy household use= r watching streaming media, a second user could have terrible shopping expe= rience with Amazon. The interactive response could be (is often) horrible. = (Personally, I would be doing email and working on a shared doc. The Amazon= analogy probably applies to more people.)

How can we deliver gracef= ul performance to both persons in a household?
Is seeking graceful perfo= rmance too complicated to improve?
(I said =E2=80=9Cgraceful=E2=80=9D to= allow technical flexibility.)

Gene
-----------------------------= -----------------
Eugene Chang

__________________________________= _____________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.buffer= bloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listin= fo/starlink

_________= ______________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/sta= rlink

__________________________________= _____________
Starlink mailing list
Starlin= k@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink --0000000000005f3adb0617572885--