From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (unknown [66.167.227.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 055B93B2A4 for ; Sun, 14 May 2023 05:13:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dlang-mobile (unknown [10.2.2.69]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F46F18E5B6; Sun, 14 May 2023 02:13:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 14 May 2023 02:13:02 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang To: Sebastian Moeller cc: Ulrich Speidel , David Lang , "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <0no84q43-s4n6-45n8-50or-12o3rq104n99@ynat.uz> <48b00469-0dbb-54c4-bedb-3aecbf714a1a@auckland.ac.nz> <728orr66-1432-751p-263q-sqopr12s20sq@ynat.uz> <077e6ad1-d7cc-2d57-39f8-e9646bea32a5@auckland.ac.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink hidden buffers 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, 14 May 2023 09:13:03 -0000 On Sun, 14 May 2023, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > silly question, does starlink operate using fixed geographical cells and are > CPE/dishies assigned to a single cell? In which case handover would not have > to be so bad, the satellite leaving a cell is going to shed all its load and > is going to take over the previous satellite's load in the cell it just starts > serving. Assuming equal "air-conditions" the modulation scheme should be > similar. So wouldn't the biggest problem be the actual switch-over time > required for dishies to move from one satellite to the next (and would this be > in line with the reported latency spikes every 15 seconds)? yes, there was a paper not that long ago from someone who was using the starlink signal for time/location purposes that detailed the protocol and the coverage (at least at that time) in the last week or so the FCC approved increased power/utilization percentage, I don't know if units in the field have been modified to use it yet. > >> On May 14, 2023, at 10:43, Ulrich Speidel via Starlink wrote: >> >> On 14/05/2023 6:55 pm, David Lang wrote: >>> >>> I just discovered that someone is manufacturing an adapter so you no longer have >>> to cut the cable >>> >>> https://www.amazon.com/YAOSHENG-Rectangular-Adapter-Connect-Injector/dp/B0BYJTHX4P >>> >> I'll see whether I can get hold of one of these. Cutting a cable on a university IT asset as an academic is not allowed here, except if it doesn't meet electrical safety standards. > > [SM] There must be a way to get this accomplished with in regulations if > the test requiring this is somehow made part of the experiment, no? (Maybe > requires partnering with other faculties like electrical engineering to get > the necessary clout with the administration?) the other optin would be to order a second cord and cut that. You then aren't modifying the IT asset. David Lang