Hate it when that happens.
--
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 12:42 PM Cameron Crum <[email protected]> wrote:
> You guys just crossed the Star Trek/Star Wars streams. The universe will
> now explode.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 2:29 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If I have enough tachyons.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ken Hohhof
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 1:25 PM
>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>>
>> Can you make the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 1:43 PM
>> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>>
>> I have 13 mS to google.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 10:32 AM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>>
>> I don't know about *anybody* who has 40 ms in-home latency. Normal in-home
>> latency is measured in milliseconds. The WAN latency absolutely dwarfs
>> that.
>>
>> Starlink's latency is an order of magnitude larger than in-home latency.
>> Obviously this is a matter of interest when evaluating the big picture.
>>
>> Adding to that, the user can affect in-home latency, but not so much with
>> WAN latency.
>>
>> These are just facts, not opinions.
>>
>> Anyway, Starlink may even end up overdelivering on bandwidth if all goes
>> well. However, they overpromise and underdeliver on latency. Which I think
>> is a shame. It would have been much better to give realistic figures,
>> especially as there is quite high variability. I guess the pressure is
>> really high to make that FCC 100 ms cut.
>>
>> Starlink will find many takers, no doubt. As to the FCC, I will freely
>> admit
>> my bias against Starlink. I don't think Starlink should under *any*
>> circumstances get *any* subsidies. Other than that, I wish them well.
>> From a
>> purely technological standpoint I find Starlink extremely cool.
>>
>>
>> Jared
>>
>>
>> > From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]>
>> > To: "'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'" <[email protected]>
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>> >
>> > We're obsessing over the wide area latency even though it goes to
>> > space and back, but the in-home latency is not much less and nobody
>> > every seems to worry about it.
>> >
>> > Other than the occasional diehard gamer, nobody "hardwires" their
>> > devices anymore, it's all WiFi.
>> >
>> > Another way of saying the Starlink numbers don't sound too bad.
>> > Hoping the FCC will disqualify them based on latency sounds like a
>> > long shot. Not like Hughesnet where the latency actually does suck.
>> >
>> > Also most customers never look at latency numbers, and if they do,
>> > they probably don't understand that lower is better. Oh no, my ping
>> > is only 15, it used to be 500 with Hughesnet.
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected]
>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 10:29 AM
>> > To: [email protected]
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>> >
>> > 1/3/15 ms. How is that relevant?
>> >
>> >
>> > Jared
>> >
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2020 at 11:20 AM
>> > > From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]>
>> > > To: "'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'" <[email protected]>
>> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>> > >
>> > > And what is the min/avg/max latency over typical home WiFi from
>> > > router to
>> > device?
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected]
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 10:06 AM
>> > > To: [email protected]
>> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>> > >
>> > > Yes, I've seen that email. You'll note that they very carefully
>> > > avoid
>> > mentioning that the latency targets are best case minimum latencies,
>> > not average latency or even latency upper and lower limits.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Jared
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > From: "Darin Steffl" <[email protected]>
>> > > To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <[email protected]>
>> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>> > >
>> > > Here's the email Starlink sent out a week ago, attached. 16 to 19ms
>> > > latency target in summer of 2021
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 9:57 AM
>> > > <[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]> wrote:From: "Bill
>> > > Prince" <[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]>
>> > > To: [email protected][mailto:[email protected]]
>> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Starlink latency highly variable - up to 120 ms
>> > > >
>> > > > I call that BS. It means they can route the traffic to the nearest
>> > > > end point. I think it will make a massive difference.
>> > > You can call BS all day long til you are blue in the face, it
>> > > won't
>> > change facts.
>> > >
>> > > The minimum end user latency is dominated by the RF space segment
>> > > which
>> > is currently averaging 40 ms. There are promises about lowering this,
>> > but nobody has ever claimed any numbers lower than 20 ms.
>> > >
>> > > It means jack all to the end user if Starlink uses a space laser
>> > > to do
>> > one or two hops when they have to pay a 20-40 ms penalty to go up and
>> > down.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Jared
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > AF mailing list
>> > > [email protected][mailto:[email protected]]
>> > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>> > > --
>> > >
>> > > Darin Steffl
>> > > Minnesota WiFi
>> > > www.mnwifi.com[http://www.mnwifi.com/]
>> > > 507-634-WiFi
>> > > Like us on Facebook[http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi]-- AF
>> > > mailing list [email protected]
>> > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com[http://af.afmug
>> > > .c om/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com]
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > AF mailing list
>> > > [email protected]
>> > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > AF mailing list
>> > > [email protected]
>> > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > AF mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > AF mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>> >
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
> --
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
