From: Frantisek Borsik <frantisek.borsik@gmail.com>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Taht via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] fcc NOI response due Dec 1
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 17:06:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJUtOOjemuXG3m41aDdhKTcoOk73VQ4pi_1g6R26GXiE4KT_aA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw7nqPYyQ=qJbc_RoVJHRt-df5FwQ3_C08u0222ROfJXaQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2102 bytes --]
If I understand it correctly, FCC reasoning for it was that Starlink is
still kind of "risky" technology:
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-386140A1.pdf
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 Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 4:53 PM Dave Taht via Starlink <
starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> We started work on a response to the FCC NOI requesting feedback as to
> future broadband bandwidth requirements for the USA early this
> morning.
>
> I am unfamiliar with the processes by which Starlink was disqualified
> from the RDOF?, and a little out of date as to current performance. It
> is very clear they are aiming for 100/20 speedtest performance and
> frequently achieving it.
>
> A drafty draft is here, and some of the language is being toned down
> by popular request. (the pre-readers were lucky! I cut the cuss-words
> out) There is only one joke in the whole thing. I'm slipping!.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19ADByjakzQXCj9Re_pUvrb5Qe5OK-QmhlYRLMBY4vH4/edit?usp=sharing
>
> I have some starlink info contained in appendix B so far, but I would
> prefer not to cite my own long term plot as I did, and also cite
> others that have a good latency measurement, I like the 15s irtt plots
> I have seen gone by. If you have research about starlink you would
> like me to cite in this context, please comment on the link above!
>
> The NOI is the first link, and it helpe me, actually, to start with
> the FCC commissioners' comments at the end, rather than read through
> the whole thing. Not that I would not welcome more folk submitting
> themselves to that...
>
>
> --
> :( My old R&D campus is up for sale: https://tinyurl.com/yurtlab
> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4071 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-27 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-27 15:53 Dave Taht
2023-11-27 16:06 ` Frantisek Borsik [this message]
2023-11-27 18:31 ` J Pan
2023-11-28 15:42 ` Livingood, Jason
2023-11-28 22:58 ` Dave Taht
2023-12-07 11:49 ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-12-07 12:25 ` 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=CAJUtOOjemuXG3m41aDdhKTcoOk73VQ4pi_1g6R26GXiE4KT_aA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=frantisek.borsik@gmail.com \
--cc=dave.taht@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