From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.nextlayer.at (smtp2.nextlayer.at [IPv6:2a01:190:1764:150::37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1058E3B29E for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 17:02:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.0.49] (d50-117-141-56.yt.northwestel.net [50.117.141.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.nextlayer.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA4218083D4 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 23:02:31 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.nextlayer.at BA4218083D4 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 15:02:29 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100411 Thunderbird/2.0.0.24 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 Content-Language: en-GB To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <1p492142-q944-r494-6s6r-p6q37s57qnq4@ynat.uz> <1F1EB112F8CB446FAB4BF308A76955FA@SRA6> <0ac195f5-3668-4c96-8dec-8a2d59a0bd52@Spark> <866405-s043-n12n-6pqs-46o38r189218@ynat.uz> From: Daniel AJ Sokolov In-Reply-To: <866405-s043-n12n-6pqs-46o38r189218@ynat.uz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink Roaming 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, 21 Feb 2022 22:02:34 -0000 On 2022-02-21 at 13:52, David Lang wrote: > > They told me that I could try it, and it may work, may be degraded a > bit, or may not work at all. They do plan to add roaming capabilities in > the future (my guess is that the laser satellites will enable a lot more > flexibility) Isn't that a very optimistic assessment? :-) Laser links are great for remote locations with very few users, but how could they relieve overbooking of Starlink in areas with too many users? The laser links can reduce the required density of ground stations, but they don't add capacity to the network. Any ground station not built thanks to laser links adds load to other ground stations - and, maybe more importantly, adds load to the satellite that does eventually connect to a ground station. Can laser links really help on a large scale, or are they just a small help here and there? Cheers Daniel