From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from NAM11-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn8nam11on2100.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.236.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4E4F3CB37 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:47:14 -0400 (EDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=XgCHgf7eSgCu44uY8Ux6mxFPTUKTf/5AwRn+yZDrsJQ1on1SqxX70unT7zotldIQvI+rrep85beU2AmgnOFCCM5v9ZEuObIJDrFoRxJ7BgqfoOmqb4C9M2JhgqPsYPxNsS7wWpgGS05BKXki24i6kHy9gRNG7J3WeRKQ/R8BrcuZlndoSFRIDel2enq5ya9bBzJuo5NnWL0iglm/uGzVBRBwyHZWvbR8V8zprVkS853dunCiApB6JuaFs0cXMW5i2EXOMAFyhsdNGQ+hTDN3VgatdHPbVAgbL6pvggzgDEQMXbnRwNCwgykoV8yGTPZjgMwxLZbJnXEtIa/wIiKdFw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=O+jGic7Tf5ktljxSl57zns5s3+8oV5O5PcW/hdyUJzc=; b=glP77JVPgrQ9HvILshoBHzF1n8/lXkdAV/2JwJApnrreHD0lgRMpTpBJ2WrWdAknoU/vvFu7C/UuZXys1FcndDAX2c9QM8XGnFzuFbfP+dIARFK9foKcnF8LgqwsFRT2/92+ba1l8KyIgmqddj+c0x3HBd6mMctDNbVlQ8uoM5qxOuB6mfVlWOVkn1HSPzff2ltGQi+EX3iHRXJHhsgjP4VkDY8xTHe80U3JQFspRUX8hJFIrWVYjVNp93yxVV8qB/1Dr8hutmHlSe902WALJBh1bQ2VIt61ETT6y8+Uwl+mn2OeWNxLd5jE/l1tkEYdoGH1ZGAgO/W2l/RwAr6SCw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=higbie.name; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=higbie.name; dkim=pass header.d=higbie.name; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=higbie.name; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=O+jGic7Tf5ktljxSl57zns5s3+8oV5O5PcW/hdyUJzc=; b=L2Z7L0aeWfwGTRl6/RfSmTMpL6RzP4FhpHuY7pKj9U3lJq5tPw84TVc+lK09/+FE4W8N5PB7r6qvZT0+E6wq8IodrcZh14R+wseb5aHVz5sk1aT/nlCwOqMjf5v9KZ8TMTksVkAS0ghIMBsazAr4b0L7mQOIHRP0kKxcHkvf4+fNaPbvB2nZJyeGIo7rzFQXPNGRGFFXGAroI5x/q154GTPEVQZGQztRSzrz8vcXwxGep+m9OKOw4SMqS2NjXiS8UJbPCHq769MVWufVcvwLTIqvitQ4VZ9BT93XcpdhP0hf1ZbGGwMpy6q9BOkqByWVM3VjaSo0OVRYc06G8x2osg== Received: from MN2PR16MB3391.namprd16.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:150::23) by IA1PR16MB5480.namprd16.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:44a::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.7386.25; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:47:11 +0000 Received: from MN2PR16MB3391.namprd16.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::db04:ae4f:d3a5:293a]) by MN2PR16MB3391.namprd16.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::db04:ae4f:d3a5:293a%7]) with mapi id 15.20.7386.023; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:47:11 +0000 From: Colin_Higbie To: David Lang , Dave Taht via Starlink Thread-Topic: =?iso-8859-7?Q?[Starlink]_It=A2s_the_Latency,_FCC?= Thread-Index: AQHady2hf4xwg147ykO0yCxzaj374LE6pwhggABXnICAARMh8A== Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:47:11 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5CA23B3B-B3FB-4749-97BD-05D3A4552453@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=Higbie.name; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR16MB3391:EE_|IA1PR16MB5480:EE_ x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 77324ab2-d537-4af3-776e-08dc46998283 x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:MN2PR16MB3391.namprd16.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230031)(376005)(366007)(1800799015)(38070700009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: =?iso-8859-7?Q?Vcd32W5k1Kumhp1RWR1ob1CwSAwb4iOr6nFGPg4nDcb9ZJNqSy8d73Rf3M?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?WVjnyeVzyzAAQgxIC9NK4kSoxY4DWCkFWJPwXZrd4svBkncMP1LavyNpmo?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?x7PGf6koZhs60USNvs2a+gPrPqWoFxIL0gPBNlOXGJ/rlMN3qtCWANRDAL?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?x+gp4cxEYKKo7YM82vuMYgvmPfsACT9jwCnPwGTJKa2vsURtjrlOYMFpSp?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?eJqTZaSu11+T7+EIE6pvpYXNrVvhXMBSCOo+p+eg4eLaWsL8e7zhnGn17d?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?5z0mwZ/G8ab6KWBw76bYN59V/ojtyX1cHo3mB4LTlbrKV96o5BngLy/Qj4?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?8HcODBiDQdJZXD5Fom6uy03V2Bj2/wOfSAj9SILb/5dx9XfBiiHxe3M7OR?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?uhKoboEwkVKa3poCQA7fSSxLxamrt+SFWhfMgWxKfVzLsdD6/igVZz2n8D?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?glm62q9+odUacWvL5jQio9JLOUyGbb2hPLi9F6vh8JvtoqwmZFbX5IUmsH?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?GX+KoXJVADSQ3Se/je3vPOTMckUv2Abfwa+4Y62tjVuO3oV+ko5H/96Iyh?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?Zq2/UrLfFr0iW6qgUeyhbfHWDgPGavnER4MrbRdF96QHjt6FOT24Ajg1zj?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?RWS2bwHEfpQo00/t57W8Hly9eU9Tm0iXsjMko/7W16Q5+mfN1EHWy3BEhH?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?eCHQpJXzEiQPL2eSM/r+GeylylvppK4FBRytC4vTAhEM70Kgbn0Mes3+bm?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?S9WLnaWKLVwqIu082I+YV5y2iDNG5DvwR5T+ihoieEAQuXhHuG29fA1vLl?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?+AJkLKb0JbozLsxvRTW6cAC0RnxVUxXiqWI1xNpvFfB8aT9Prjp+MkDsmW?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?Grf8BQmOSk/8oX2lNNkKaH3HQSYKtidHS/N2doN7iS4VfQPkaOBSjYQ4J3?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?mgLKDE6wWGEjEXQmH1k/GA5X7AbK46h6E5yaOxxJsQykYKotznw2uPwOhA?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?OgI3rbCPbfoDbEKcTFvxcSp/zLeoJG7ervvYdilyKtyex23JIA5OjU5uEI?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?9hfjxXagydL1Eh+jHTcYjkUh67bW0XctMBKZbtZEc0aAXE610Yf9Um6Sww?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?sBGxx1E1YIdFTbOzVn8mPOhHNDAgl0//DpakpxrrqQdygXQwULavqhi6fR?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?MDSYQPBYoH0h3NdVY+KhPb3Gc6BCl6qAy06VatBvAoThojDFeBXsAwhqbM?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?qpgK94CyFTAY8PBEMekkrB4FVvQT5v1WZiELR/oZXUSkq5MYvgXlyMktxG?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?wzkFTV7CZFf+Z7eV7Fal2AfnhbH5ObFaeGCF/LV26Jx2X8SCrPB0ESe7iP?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?yOl/WmNKkhRarU93UFEUocG+IPAzAomXjndRx/MA5P5eB0X6BmUVNe0j3n?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?KXB58Fi6PAdu3JBaL0z4T5boQK3uz1IbC0SFtveVH3RID/AuuIOEbGpvhg?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?yvu6mWkx/EK2qfkTvU/zQFP7mrQo82Id4cAwFB+eYIvLSDNClYSHUk6zCi?= =?iso-8859-7?Q?LvSpH3GA18MC/aHRlOdTwdklaFoQ?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: higbie.name X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: MN2PR16MB3391.namprd16.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 77324ab2-d537-4af3-776e-08dc46998283 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 Mar 2024 15:47:11.3088 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 223bbcd9-6252-452c-afb2-140040991a08 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: eg2JSPPn4hhynIlWQNcs8EdhAHkCXGIP59h5+gtSNEym4rp8lvkaDThTfDins+fHOmxJzsjYj13CBEKmub2/Ug== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: IA1PR16MB5480 Subject: Re: [Starlink] =?iso8859-7?q?It=A2s_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: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:47:14 -0000 David, Just on that one point that you "don't think developers think about latency= at all," what developers (en masse, and as managed by their employers) car= e about is the user experience. If they don't think latency is an important= part of the UX, then indeed they won't think about it. However, if latency= is vital to the UX, such as in gaming or voice and video calling, it will = be a focus.=20 Standard QA will include use cases that they believe reflect the majority o= f their users. We have done testing with artificially high latencies to sim= ulate geosynchronous satellite users, back when they represented a notable = portion of our userbase. They no longer do (thanks to services like Starlin= k and recent proliferation of FTTH and even continued spreading of slower c= able and DSL availability into more rural areas), so we no longer include t= hose high latencies in our testing. This does indeed mean that our services= will probably become less tolerant of higher latencies (and if we still ha= ve any geosynchronous satellite customers, they may resent this possible de= gradation in service). Some could call this lazy on our part, but it's just= doing what's cost effective for most of our users.=20 I'm estimating, but I think probably about 3 sigma of our users have typica= l latency (unloaded) of under 120ms. You or others on this list probably kn= ow better than I what fraction of our users will suffer severe enough buffe= rbloat to push a perceptible % of their transactions beyond 200ms.=20 Fortunately, in our case, even high latency shouldn't be too terrible, but = as you rightly point out, if there are many iterations, 1s minimum latency = could yield a several second lag, which would be poor UX for almost any app= lication. Since we're no longer testing for that on the premise that 1s min= imum latency is no longer a common real-world scenario, it's possible those= painful lags could creep into our system without our knowledge. This is rational and what we should expect and want application and solutio= n developers to do. We would not want developers to spend time, and thereby= increase costs, focusing on areas that are not particularly important to t= heir users and customers.=20 Cheers, Colin -----Original Message----- From: David Lang =20 Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2024 7:06 PM To: Colin_Higbie Cc: Dave Taht via Starlink Subject: RE: [Starlink] It=A2s the Latency, FCC On Sat, 16 Mar 2024, Colin_Higbie wrote: > At the same time, I do think if you give people tools where latency is=20 > rarely an issue (say a 10x improvement, so perception of 1/10 the=20 > latency), developers will be less efficient UNTIL that inefficiency=20 > begins to yield poor UX. For example, if I know I can rely on latency=20 > being 10ms and users don't care until total lag exceeds 500ms, I might=20 > design something that uses a lot of back-and-forth between client and=20 > server. As long as there are fewer than > 50 iterations (500 / 10), users will be happy. But if I need to do 100=20 > iterations to get the result, then I'll do some bundling of the=20 > operations to keep the total observable lag at or below that 500ms. I don't think developers think about latency at all (as a general rule)