From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (045-059-245-186.biz.spectrum.com [45.59.245.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A02623B29D for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2024 20:29:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (syslog [10.0.0.100]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7161E1C1C90; Wed, 24 Jan 2024 17:29:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 17:29:33 -0800 (PST) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Oleg Kutkov cc: Jonathan Bennett , starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net In-Reply-To: <895f12d4-9941-484d-aca1-05f988a4be59@olegkutkov.me> Message-ID: References: <10cabe9d-0c0f-4adc-baf7-0ba487867352@olegkutkov.me> <7849c840-fe56-4867-91bd-613c3d2b5f42@gmail.com> <4efa1525-98e7-4aae-aad0-2a0a8c29ce38@olegkutkov.me> <895f12d4-9941-484d-aca1-05f988a4be59@olegkutkov.me> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="680960-1306760396-1706146173=:27359" Subject: Re: [Starlink] First tests of the Starlink REV4 (aka gen3) 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: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 01:29:34 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --680960-1306760396-1706146173=:27359 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Thu, 25 Jan 2024, Oleg Kutkov via Starlink wrote: > The PoE "standard" is the same. That is true, but the pinout is slightly different on the articulated dish David Lang > Thus, you can power the new terminal with any Starlink PoE injector (even > REV1). > > On 1/25/24 01:40, Jonathan Bennett wrote: >> I'm mainly curious if the move back to RJ45 means they are now using a real >> POE standard, instead of the custom solution the previous generations have >> used. >> >> Jonathan Bennett >> Hackaday.com >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 4:47 PM Oleg Kutkov via Starlink >> wrote: >> >> I will try to do better tests this weekend, measuring all the >> necessary >> parameters. Plus IPv6 >> >> On 1/24/24 14:37, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink wrote: >> > Thanks for the tests! >> > >> > The dl/ul speeds 300/15 mbit/s are impressive. >> > >> > At video pointer 5:53 the reported Ping ?/dl/ul 88/204/121 ms and >> > Jitter 9.2 ms seem interesting. >> > >> >     ==> I am not sure which of the two (ping or jitter) you name >> > 'latency'? >> > >> >     ==> I am not sure why the dl (download) ping ms is higher >> than the >> > ul. >> > >> >     ==> I don't know what is the first ('?') parameter reported as >> > 88ms for Ping? >> > >> > I wonder whether the DHCPv6-PD is still supported by REV4 and >> whether >> > the allocated prefix is still a non-/64 (i.e. a /56 delivered by >> > DHCPv6-PD reported earlier on this email list by Steven on Dec. 12, >> > 2023)? >> > >> > Alex >> > >> > Le 23/01/2024 à 10:07, Oleg Kutkov via Starlink a écrit : >> >> I conducted the initial comparative tests of the new terminal in >> >> Ukraine. I guess it's not a really "legal" because the new >> terminal >> >> is not certified and not selling outside the US for the moment. >> But >> >> who cares. >> >> >> >> Here's a video: https://youtu.be/hWPMpJrjd1g >> >> >> >> I will try to do more technical tests next week. There will be >> a new >> >> video. >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Starlink mailing list >> > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >> >> -- Best regards, >> Oleg Kutkov >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >> > --680960-1306760396-1706146173=:27359--