From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 79EE83CB37 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2023 09:48:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 392DmISu021724 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:48:18 +0200 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id C08B82090B4 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:48:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B390E208D78 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:48:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.14.2.95] ([10.14.2.95]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 392DmIvb019735 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:48:18 +0200 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:48:18 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: fr To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <94994411-fb55-402c-9606-d2d6c4b3e6d4@gmail.com> <618b4118-cb0a-4780-a868-f390e2679d90@auckland.ac.nz> <31028.1696249662@localhost> From: Alexandre Petrescu In-Reply-To: <31028.1696249662@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Starlink] =?utf-8?q?Starlink_lost_over_200_satellites_in_two_mon?= =?utf-8?q?ths_=E2=80=93_tracker_data?= 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, 02 Oct 2023 13:48:20 -0000 Le 02/10/2023 à 14:27, Michael Richardson via Starlink a écrit : > Ulrich Speidel via Starlink wrote: > > In the case of Starlink, there is also the minor issue that their initial > > constellation that they started commercial ops with isn't ISL-capable, so > > there may be an incentive here to retire some satellites early, perhaps, and > > fill their orbital slots with more capable birds. > > I think that it falls into the fail-early dot-com mantra :-) > Shorter lifetimes means shorter times to upgrade the network. > Not just the ISL, but also the rest of the forwarding hardware. > > Given that spaceX is putting these satellites up at marginal launch costs, > and I think getting a very very significant R&D and publicity boost from the > very rapid pace of launches and booster reuses, it seems like it's just a win-win-win. I think it is excellent that a LEO constellation can be upgraded that fast.  It means there will be an ever improved service to end users.  This reliable launch frequency, orbiting, de-orbiting, are extraordinary technical achievements. However, as with everything, one should also think about the inconvenients.  It can't simply be a win-win-win, without someone to loose something. Probably one of the inconvenients is the additional risks involved by re-entry, new collision avoidance necessities, and sky observation blockage.  There is also the risk of some unwanted collision hapening up there but deemed as wanted by some.  It is new unknowns - says a non-expert -  that we add to the already shaky overall system.  They should not be overlooked. True too:  probably it is the technology too that might help alleviate these potential problems (if problems they are), and not the lack of technology. Alex > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink