[Starlink] Re: Dissecting Starlink: head-drop queuing, AQM, and flow dynamics (SIGCOMM '26)

[Jianping Pan <pan@uvic.ca>]

yes, and the starlink router is the device under test (dut) and we control both ends ;-)
--
J Pan, UVic CSc, ECS566, 250-472-5796 (NO VM), Pan@UVic.CA, Web.UVic.CA/~pan

________________________________________
From: Nitinder Mohan <N.Mohan@tudelft.nl>
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2026 8:21 AM
To: Jianping Pan; Kathleen Nichols
Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net; Hendrik Cech
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Re: Dissecting Starlink: head-drop queuing, AQM, and flow dynamics (SIGCOMM '26)

Hi J,

I didn't quite get it. Do you have a way of isolating traffic only in Starlink router (so before it is sent to the dishy)?

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Jianping Pan <pan@uvic.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, 22 July 2026 17:18:55
To: Kathleen Nichols <nichols@pollere.net>; Nitinder Mohan <N.Mohan@tudelft.nl>
Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Hendrik Cech <hendrik.cech@tum.de>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Re: Dissecting Starlink: head-drop queuing, AQM, and flow dynamics (SIGCOMM '26)

we can measure the traffic in and out of the starlink router to profile it for you. cheers.  -j
--
J Pan, UVic CSc, ECS566, 250-472-5796 (NO VM), Pan@UVic.CA, Web.UVic.CA/~pan

________________________________________
From: Nitinder Mohan via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2026 7:26 AM
To: Kathleen Nichols
Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net; Hendrik Cech
Subject: [Starlink] Re: Dissecting Starlink: head-drop queuing, AQM, and flow dynamics (SIGCOMM '26)

Hi Kathie,

You are, indeed, absolutely correct. Our takeaway largely is that the AQM being used is proprietary, it resembles A-RED and CoDEL at some instances but its not a 1:1 match. SpaceX also confirms that there is some “inspiration". We have a discussion on this in sec 4.3 on page 8.

Best,

Nitinder

> On 22 Jul 2026, at 15:49, Kathleen Nichols via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
>
> This is interesting work, thanks. But I want to point out that, if indeed the "Loss frequency grows with queue occupancy" that isn't CoDel which increases loss frequency with a persistent sojourn delay. (A large point of CoDel was to get away from queue occupancy as a congestion signal.)
>
>       Kathie
>
> On 7/22/26 2:00 AM, Nitinder Mohan via Starlink wrote:
> ...
>>   *   There is a real AQM that deliberately drops to control occupancy. The uplink is aggressive and holds flows below a quarter of physical capacity. The downlink is more permissive. Loss frequency grows with queue occupancy, and the load-dependent profile looks closer to CoDel or adaptive RED than fixed RED.
> ...
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list -- starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> To unsubscribe send an email to starlink-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net

_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list -- starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
To unsubscribe send an email to starlink-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net