From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [67.231.154.184]) (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 9865F3B29D for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 18:39:30 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Proofpoint Essentials engine Received: from mail3.candelatech.com (mail2.candelatech.com [208.74.158.173]) by mx1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (PPE Hosted ESMTP Server) with ESMTP id 0EEA7B0002E for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 22:39:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.115] (unknown [98.97.113.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail3.candelatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EBA0913C2B0 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 15:39:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail3.candelatech.com EBA0913C2B0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=candelatech.com; s=default; t=1678660768; bh=qA3NZF28Vqmdz+qcbRrGtd5tmFhQk03pQD9tBkrszfI=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=YnGhmfvNfDKJVW13oGokiZOc5cFnCGHCL0J7B68FcqyfLeYMZ3B74R9rwoJ/Gkwvz 1BBDKSnti6alr9MtEKLoJuvcbUbN3YflOOr71bdeIzTcuykBe98jaUBzRbhPPoHBPB 87E5EalTQjTUTJOEqtqwlkV9i6Q0ST0+TDFSl6BY= To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <1de20b8357ea243f9faa1cb2c0295cb5@rjmcmahon.com> From: Ben Greear Organization: Candela Technologies Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2023 15:39:27 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1de20b8357ea243f9faa1cb2c0295cb5@rjmcmahon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-MW Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MDID: 1678660769-FtwULZV6Iby8 X-MDID-O: us5;at1;1678660769;FtwULZV6Iby8; Subject: Re: [Starlink] [Rpm] so great to see ISPs that care 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, 12 Mar 2023 22:39:30 -0000 On 3/12/23 2:02 PM, rjmcmahon via Starlink wrote: > iperf 2 uses responses per second and also provides the bounce back times as well as one way delays. > > The hypothesis is that network engineers have to fix KPI issues, including latency, ahead of shipping products. > > Asking companies to act on consumer complaints is way too late. It's also extremely costly. Those running Amazon customer service can explain how these consumer > calls about their devices cause things like device returns (as that's all the call support can provide.) This wastes energy to physically ship things back, > causes a stack of working items that now go to ewaste, etc. > > It's really on network operators, suppliers and device mfgs to get ahead of this years before consumers get their stuff. > > As a side note, many devices select their WiFi chanspec (AP channel+) based on the strongest RSSI. The network paths should be based on KPIs like low latency. > Strong signal just means an AP is yelling to loudly and interfering with the neighbors. Try the optimal AP chanspec that has 10dB separation per spatial > dimension and the whole apartment complex would be better for it. How are you going to make the latency determination? I guess that anywhere there are a lot of APs you can connect to, they are managed entity with some sort of global controller for that location. So then the controller can make the decision. That general ability for controller to manage stations already exists in wifi, but someone will have to make a clever controller... If it is wired/fiber backhaul, then probably everyone shares same uplink so selecting strongest AP is best option. If wifi backhaul, you need a lot more cleverness to manage stations properly. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com