Re: [Starlink] fcc NOI response due Dec 1

[Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>]

Thank you for having prepared this response.

It is a US-centric context, but it might apply everywhere else where 
fiber and satcom access are considered in competition.  Besides, the 
latency reduction priming over bandwidth increase, might be discussed in 
a 6G context as well, be that with NTN or without.

Now that the we are past the deadline, I would like to mention two other 
aspects:

- all access kinds in recent years have witnessed combined improvement 
of bandwidhts and latencies.  Within a same access kind (e.g. within 
WiFi, within Ethernet, within cellular) each increase of bandwidth was 
accompanied by a decrease of latency.  As such, it might look surprising 
to argue in favor of latency decrease at the expense of a constant 
bandwidth.  It might not happen, because traditionnaly they are combined.

- a strong argument could be made in favor of satcom over fiber in 
remote areas: satcom avoids the tangled fibers and satcom might pollute 
less than fiber; but at two conditions: satcom should have a sat exit 
strategy (more than just burning upon re-entry, maybe more recover and 
reuse, less visual pollution with maybe more paintings) and (2) satcom 
should aim at a same kind of... latency (yes, that!) that fiber aims 
at.  The 10ms that starlink aims at is way too high compared to what 
fiber access latency aims at.  IT is possible to aim at lower.

Alex

Le 27/11/2023 à 16:53, Dave Taht via Starlink a écrit :
> We started work on a response to the FCC NOI requesting feedback as to
> future broadband bandwidth requirements for the USA early this
> morning.
>
> I am unfamiliar with the processes by which Starlink was disqualified
> from the RDOF?, and a little out of date as to current performance. It
> is very clear they are aiming for 100/20 speedtest performance and
> frequently achieving it.
>
> A drafty draft is here, and some of the language is being toned down
> by popular request. (the pre-readers were lucky! I cut the cuss-words
> out) There is only one joke in the whole thing. I'm slipping!.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19ADByjakzQXCj9Re_pUvrb5Qe5OK-QmhlYRLMBY4vH4/edit?usp=sharing
>
> I have some starlink info contained in appendix B so far, but I would
> prefer not to cite my own long term plot as I did, and  also cite
> others that have a good latency measurement, I like the 15s irtt plots
> I have seen gone by. If you have research about starlink you would
> like me to cite in this context, please comment on the link above!
>
> The NOI is the first link, and it helpe me, actually, to start with
> the FCC commissioners' comments at the end, rather than read through
> the whole thing. Not that I would not welcome more folk submitting
> themselves to that...
>
>