From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg1-x533.google.com (mail-pg1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::533]) (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 59AB93B29D for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:22:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x533.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-5ce2aada130so4302197a12.1 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:22:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ieee.org; s=google; t=1714512171; x=1715116971; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Y3++O9Wi0U2x2tjFs8Yb2wtcB6wGVVxLmsrw3veYQTI=; b=UYDNiLYq1SIBHsBAPJ8ZW1+7HbxzPMn8oSqlIjZ/7ikzPIOLvdce9ZXImqZdsZEO2M Eql9+LpIYvZWhTEChwX/IH8IPRi9gcudrXh5c+yVO6d4M2J44Cx5HjqrFErYF/Ys98G3 YGa3R+ouV5uFMr+eJMmdozbCHz15HbQLaMQwE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1714512171; x=1715116971; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Y3++O9Wi0U2x2tjFs8Yb2wtcB6wGVVxLmsrw3veYQTI=; b=tf0+t/ApZM4MUEoq+TkqfOl7EJo9tVUefflHMgSD0Y9iyHMvb8VpxmAn+Fl8l7hqR1 r368Ze/+nBiuA+vWkFGwxjwIkIhzo+3qbtsGzvoS9oU3TkCKdPiFdaYgQXkfSJl/x6BE L9Uy8s+80lZUWLTTPeMfjaz0mH4SoWEt5Is7W/caUDax2OoLx6mI03CnenmMsdD1TM1e 9FHWLd9UAdXP0U76qqTVigDwmjpzVgfRBy1eGJZpVpXgq20Cj6+Bc1SrQLxM8gz7kZZ2 daSqI8BasRb9l/OPCyV5NCpUPXxkVGbq96yStGc8CVHZfnVMDCNWBHRvbeMZETvYE+1c a4LA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVOwee1BJHIbc1pC9AhGhBT9WdQTTzXvVxGoQZVZ9jmV96D09OepQtOflC7RM02oCnXnBbyINZw3oU80diNfpyNsX7lKwr+8ur6KUMTqPY= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyZfB6yjFJ7zpgUtP83+z4tvlBTCqB8vHf7Pt77QSDjwxk+ePC3 QgGuzRm6jhxgisJotrRrvv995hahgxE9DAs1dCs7bLTch/DEpEy7evcTvvRdpQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG907MfeC2RuE4AIwFPu3+LllsiYLBSVGbZ3J99Ec5yg9/taszXrCqH4bVR8fcgexhg/g3gkw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:1596:b0:1ad:80ed:41 with SMTP id h22-20020a056a20159600b001ad80ed0041mr1102319pzj.58.1714512170932; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (dhcp-72-253-194-45.hawaiiantel.net. [72.253.194.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x23-20020a056a00189700b006edadf8058asm21564561pfh.23.2024.04.30.14.22.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:22:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Eugene Y Chang Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6C3585E7-5DF6-4DEB-878B-DEB98246C6F8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.8\)) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:22:47 -1000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Eugene Y Chang , Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink , libreqos To: Dave Taht References: <1A972680-ECA5-42CA-BE8B-6BBD46FF5E74@ieee.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.8) 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 21:22:52 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_6C3585E7-5DF6-4DEB-878B-DEB98246C6F8 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_118EB4F5-4F52-4AC4-91FE-05080BB57CED" --Apple-Mail=_118EB4F5-4F52-4AC4-91FE-05080BB57CED Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 OK. I need help teaching my ISPs that they can 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 latency issues = would be solved? What won=E2=80=99t get fixed? How do we make this a = widely adopted 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: >=20 > Just fq codel or cake everything and you get all that. >=20 > 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 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) >=20 > 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 = the waveform test results handy but they are amazing. I feel a sea = change in the wind... >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024, 12:51=E2=80=AFPM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink = > = 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 = current ISP practices fall short. Can we help them improve their = service? >=20 > Am I asking too much? >=20 > Gene > ---------------------------------------------- > Eugene Chang > IEEE Life Senior Member >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Apr 30, 2024, at 9:31 AM, Colin_Higbie via Starlink = > = wrote: >>=20 >> Gene, >>=20 >> 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, = not 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 able to perform standard Internet functions. >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> 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 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. >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> Cheers, >> Colin >>=20 >>=20 >> -----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 >>=20 >>=20 >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> 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" >>=20 >> I am always surprised how complicated these discussions become. = (Surprised mostly because I forgot the kind of issues this community = care about.) The discussion doesn=E2=80=99t shed light on the following = scenarios. >>=20 >> While watching stream content, activating controls needed to switch = content sometimes (often?) have long pauses. I attribute that to buffer = bloat and high latency. >>=20 >> With a happy household user watching streaming media, a second user = could 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.) >>=20 >> 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.) >>=20 >> Gene >> ---------------------------------------------- >> Eugene Chang >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net = >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink = >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink = --Apple-Mail=_118EB4F5-4F52-4AC4-91FE-05080BB57CED Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 OK. = I need help teaching my ISPs that they can 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 latency issues would be solved? What = won=E2=80=99t get fixed? How do we make this a widely adopted 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 <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 their data plane. Perhaps we should do a public demo of what it = can do for every 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)

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 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> 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 current 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, not 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 able 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 be 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 <starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> 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 <eugene.chang@ieee.org>
To: Colin_Higbie = <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>, Dave Taht = via Starlink
<starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
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 care about.) The discussion doesn=E2=80=99t shed light on the = following scenarios.

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 could 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

= --Apple-Mail=_118EB4F5-4F52-4AC4-91FE-05080BB57CED-- --Apple-Mail=_6C3585E7-5DF6-4DEB-878B-DEB98246C6F8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEERPTGiBqcibajhTSsv0/8FiYdKmAFAmYxYScACgkQv0/8FiYd KmDtCg//Y8L6mqgXFCjBfFX3aZBysCNbQFHWYC8aXOfQ4uPwvf7EZ9dzwJC2AgUf Wtb9TBaFEkUAAzUTapj90MQRz4ai6Ekj9nXN07p21wGBq+RDyHhPPszIY3FBODXM hq7VWkxofMjaUemo+Q063ToU19BIAyssiMYf0xUycZ64M6vikOqUpVyNVSoPv/Lz qZ0rZZrKrq+Qm94gog26s0gTKAuQpQiUIDsCCM2bUuLVgeVx7ETRCCd36+HUnKUM jV1o5Nr6E9tutdEGySVa9JkuMHmXsMG/mihbgedqWvkU4LLnMohwWHjcnLLmSOlg PkJ40oBMHPKorkZY2KH0GK0JOcfs7sPsOD0z+s63St2oie0orwgDqEGDH7PPobHu 2L9WmyXYzTCTOPWiw/0+TLKMQ35d1K+8/yk6cxZo3yfv4WZVA7yFCRtZ42az59F2 rDeoBJJYC7N879rgEBUc7wwbBdpp1lBbP2AH8cuYYE75ykxU8K47XYl32ASsXKhN MX1QYFf03hf5WmtqKLQT2dqVBFFBsLA7oQYlLokxlP6AKyjDkZWrzc9ygi1Z9Mye HEtUrqeo9xwGNCOV43KozIZQ8OLkNCEHCqV9UkWwuuqThWPT1Gr2gWqE6AmlEUqe bCHyqmfkB88/ic00KaXgJSM0M8dlC1oF3zhh+gNZD5Lq//La9Ag= =/Ry1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_6C3585E7-5DF6-4DEB-878B-DEB98246C6F8--