From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt1-x82a.google.com (mail-qt1-x82a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82a]) (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 B164E3B2A4 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:06:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qt1-x82a.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-423a9cb7e80so9691061cf.3 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:06:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1701101218; x=1701706018; 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=6SUaizA0WZy2tBmcy9UrHupiQXukanR7oNE6ulzQ5Qs=; b=K8OggGyChE7hPYVKflck3LZTSkcwGlgtjazTUbscwI1BMUmgUqnP89nEhLND0OMfxt J4MieVY+DKW0mverHbU0J35xxWWGFVIO/03tI8AVOdCVhKMWTzxL83oUGfaggpyrSYUH OlwZ9fcgvaYpv51s+u/5gnu+j6OJNQgHjuYPcLerwCftHrpUSp6EiBqRqPbgORaCHHCB rzabP5IasYyq4EUhl4PPDpJ4ZN6RuDEjzf8PCbycsqdtkbNUDhUgAe4aVPZUHkdlSjAi P76bYPB0WzbRJyxxHPGZT1LHR8E4Ptuwn3XRkeeZefZFLKvMF4ryHoE804i/Wz1cKk8c lr7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1701101218; x=1701706018; 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=6SUaizA0WZy2tBmcy9UrHupiQXukanR7oNE6ulzQ5Qs=; b=A25KL6UddadyTRZZetQ50MkNSEk/ERpO+vwvSfX86EnFRB1saDSDOj/Bw5fXir/ox+ 3/Ym2rTKBC650i7etEwPaHwu1MMev5HbgNKryRKkhvlRTFu9SoQOQPpOg322/SgqPbyJ Mr1hPbVJhrzq8pa7WRRjY5cKTFk8ibkaGjlUQ8FpZKPVt/lWnyw2GaeKG7c3cKQF1AMj VeNktih3uWRfosVDHGey8r5XohK7S07Uy8Gt7hsLIhinPkKxBw9ncAbUnxGL+/i5Fsiy k0azvYEVLt43o06Aq8LBEsw0OKgBE5AAs033qHdl+dUX2U3jnPU0aMjj9yIABswXWxop h9Yg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwosOTmPyUvjQrPlQOWnEQRhaMq7xuJ57wUVNXhPvuV8pdwC6jI VOPHzSAJPCqWPgTxBlEE1vx+J08WBWPBdhZlyfUM6jfIF3c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFeSWj2l/ipp9wc97nZdGd5h82Pj+QjyhBN+JYSgSjseOoDaiy3k20iONE4+mswq6TkzSz07EC+qAZzSeXzV2U= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:6087:b0:423:a073:8938 with SMTP id hf7-20020a05622a608700b00423a0738938mr11087665qtb.7.1701101217830; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:06:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Frantisek Borsik Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 17:06:21 +0100 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: Dave Taht via Starlink Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d0db07060b247d52" Subject: Re: [Starlink] fcc NOI response due Dec 1 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, 27 Nov 2023 16:06:58 -0000 --000000000000d0db07060b247d52 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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=E2=80=AFPM 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-QmhlYRLM= BY4vH4/edit?usp=3Dsharing > > 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 T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > --000000000000d0db07060b247d52 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If I understand it correctly, FCC reasoning for it was tha= t Starlink is still kind of "risky" technology:=C2=A0https://docs.fcc.g= ov/public/attachments/DOC-386140A1.pdf

A= ll the best,

Frank

Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

=C2=A0

https://ww= w.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik

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

iMessage, mobile: +420775230885

Skype: casioa5302ca

frantisek.= borsik@gmail.com



<= div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 4:53=E2=80=AFP= M 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!.

ht= tps://docs.google.com/document/d/19ADByjakzQXCj9Re_pUvrb5Qe5OK-QmhlYRLMBY4v= H4/edit?usp=3Dsharing

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=C2=A0 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<= br> Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlin= k@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
--000000000000d0db07060b247d52--