Matt,
Caching is something from the 90's unless it's with a direct CDN provider
like Akamai or Netflix. If you're trying to do this yourself without
having an appliance or server farm from a CDN, you're dreaming. This is
why you won't find a Mikrotik consultant that can do the job for you.
Gone are the days of T1's and HTTP caches so get with the times. Upgrade
your middle mile circuits so this isn't a concern.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:35 PM Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com
<mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
you have to log into the netflix account and set it off auto for
each sub account
ours was 512k max. maybe resolution on a tv would have been
pixelated we did our verifications from PC
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:25 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com
<mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Interesting.
On 1/23/2020 4:23 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
> The cell carriers have caching servers installed so they can
> manipulate the traffic. We are working on doing something
similar...
> but so far every MikroTik consultant I've hired has screwed
me on this.
>
> On 1/23/20 4:21 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>> If I recall correctly, they have lower quality levels for
mobile
>> users on 4G. I wonder how they know you're mobile and
whether you
>> can trick the system into counting your user as mobile.
>>
>>
>> On 1/23/2020 4:17 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
>>> Yeah, last I looked that's what they said the lowest
quality needed.
>>> A few years back I did some testing with various speeds,
and I think
>>> I got down to somewhere around 500k before Netflix would
break. But
>>> even then, the picture quality was getting pretty ugly.
>>>
>>> But seriously... if Netflix defaulted to lower quality (not
lowest,
>>> but in the middle), and made you set it higher if you
wanted, most
>>> people would never know or care... and it'd save a lot of
bandwidth.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:14 PM Adam Moffett
<dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>
>>> <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure the lowest quality level on Netflix
needs 0.7
>>> mbps. If your rule ended up giving them 256k+512k then
it would
>>> have worked.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/23/2020 4:10 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>>> Way back in the day, when powercode had the old type
queue, we
>>>> built our basic one to buffer at 512 long enough to
maintain a 2
>>>> hour sd stream at 256k with periodic 512k bucket
refills. so
>>>> really it was 512k effectively. It may very vell be that
>>>> expectations of "standard" definition were different
back then.
>>>> but I thought that was an actual resolution standard
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:58 PM Ken Hohhof
<af...@kwisp.com <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>
>>>> <mailto:af...@kwisp.com <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>>>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don’t remember ever being able to stream Netflix
on 256K.
>>>> 1M maybe, and 1.5M still gives you decent SD. You’re
going
>>>> to need at least 2.5M though for HD. So that’s
one part of
>>>> the answer is HD. Some streaming services, like
DirecTV On
>>>> Demand, don’t have adaptive video quality and want
a minimum
>>>> of 5M to stream. Another factor is “live” video,
which is
>>>> compressed on-the-fly and probably not as
efficiently as
>>>> pre-recorded content.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, if the customer has more, video streams
will
>>>> happily use it.
>>>>
>>>> *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com>
>>>> <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com>>> *On Behalf Of *Steve Jones
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, January 23, 2020 2:29 PM
>>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
<af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>
>>>> <mailto:af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] The Future
>>>>
>>>> we are at the end of the wireless backhaul road.
when I
>>>> started 15 or so years ago, we were just moving off
a
>>>> handdful of random T1s to a bonded 6mb circuit
backhauling
>>>> that was nothing. Now we have two gig circuits on
separate
>>>> parts of our network, and we are a tiny WISP in
podunk USA..
>>>> We dont put less than 1.2gbps backhauls in for
core backhauls
>>>> now. The existing technology for distance in a
single unit us
>>>> roughly 2gbps when trying to cover any distance of
merit.
>>>> Sure you can do more than that, you can cheat
outside link
>>>> budgets and ignore your rain region. But if youre
talking
>>>> about most temperate region backhauls with
legitimate
>>>> reliability thats the wall.
>>>>
>>>> we keep poking a little more bits/hz out, but that
not really
>>>> new tech, its all dependent upon smaller and
smaller path
>>>> budgets, that eventually wont be attainable. so
you have to
>>>> start doing shorter shots, with more radios, more
channel
>>>> size, etc. eventually you hit the point where its
no longer
>>>> economically viable to keep throwing radio and
lease costs at
>>>> it and youll have to put glass in the dirt.
>>>>
>>>> Duct is whats future proof, fiber is just the
current best
>>>> long term option for transport. pending some
breakthrough
>>>> tech, its the only real long term cost effective
future
>>>> proofish option.
>>>>
>>>> We will hit a wall on demand at some point in the
near term
>>>> as we run out of things to connect.
>>>>
>>>> Can anybody answer why 256k used to be able to
deliver a
>>>> decent SD netflix stream and now i need multiple
mbps for the
>>>> same thing? asking for a friend
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:40 PM Carl Peterson
>>>> <cpeter...@portnetworks.com
<mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com>
>>>> <mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com
<mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Elon started it as a project to raise money,
yes. Morgan
>>>> Stanley is up valuing it because they don't
understand
>>>> technology. This project is not even close to
spacex's
>>>> purpose for existing. If it disappeared it
would not have
>>>> any real effect on their overall mission."
>>>>
>>>> This isn't really true. There was one primary
driver.
>>>>
>>>> 1) You need to bring down the cost of launch
considerably
>>>> in order to expand the launch market to a size
where
>>>> developing and maintaining a reusable rocket
fleet makes
>>>> sense but you can't bring down the cost of
launch till
>>>> you have customers to fill the launch
manifest and that
>>>> spool up will take years. SpaceX thinks they
have solved
>>>> this by becoming their own customer for all
their extra
>>>> launch capacity for the foreseeable future.
>>>>
>>>> When they looked at #1 above they
realized that there was
>>>> a huge potential market there and even a a few
% of the
>>>> global internet market could be a cash cow for
years to
>>>> come.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:13 PM Jason McKemie
>>>> <j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com
<mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com>
>>>> <mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com
<mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Elon started it as a project to raise
money, yes.
>>>> Morgan Stanley is up valuing it because
they don't
>>>> understand technology. This project is not
even close
>>>> to spacex's purpose for existing. If it
disappeared
>>>> it would not have any real effect on their
overall
>>>> mission.
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2020, Robert
>>>> <i...@avantwireless.com
<mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>
>>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com
<mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> um, no, Starlink is now becoming the
primary
>>>> reason for the huge run-up in
valuation for
>>>> SpaceX...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-future-multibillion-dollar-valuation-starlink-internet-morgan-stanley-2019-9
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/20 4:15 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The difference being that this is
a side
>>>> project for one of the main
businesses, not
>>>> their primary purpose. At best I
don't think
>>>> this is going to be anything
besides a better
>>>> alternative to other satellite
internet
>>>> options.
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2020,
Darin Steffl
>>>> <darin.ste...@mnwifi.com
<mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com>
>>>> <mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com
<mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Guys, lots of misinformation
here.
>>>>
>>>> They are NO plans nor hints of
>>>> integrating Starlink antennas
into Tesla
>>>> cars. It may happen but no one
has hinted
>>>> of this happening. All Tesla's
have 3G or
>>>> 4G modems already built-in to
them along
>>>> with WiFi. Updates are sent
via WiFi
>>>> first and after the fleet has
received
>>>> the updates, they eventually
push it to
>>>> cars via cellular data that
haven't
>>>> updated via WiFi.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding B2B backhaul, I
don't believe
>>>> you'll see this as an option
anytime soon
>>>> for WISP's or other ISP's.
They're
>>>> targeting residential and small
>>>> businesses as well as
>>>> government contracts. The cost
if they
>>>> did offer B2B backhaul
services would
>>>> likely be higher than fiber to
your
>>>> network. Please stop thinking
this will
>>>> happen as I bet it will not.
>>>>
>>>> They may offer a self install
option but
>>>> they'll also have a contractor
to perform
>>>> most installs for a cost is my
guess.
>>>> Maybe they'll send a self
install kit for
>>>> X price and if you can't get
it working,
>>>> they'll schedule a contract
install for
>>>> XX price.
>>>>
>>>> I'll also say that you should
not doubt
>>>> Elon's passion to achieve
great things. I
>>>> have a Tesla and it's a work
of art and
>>>> by far the best vehicle I've
ever driven.
>>>> 99% of people who have driven
one also
>>>> think this. Tesla is
succeeding, SpaceX
>>>> is on it's way there, The
Boring Company
>>>> is half done with their Vegas
tunnel, and
>>>> Starlink will likely be a viable
>>>> competitor for us.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:48
PM Ryan Ray
>>>> <ryan...@gmail.com
<mailto:ryan...@gmail.com>
>>>> <mailto:ryan...@gmail.com <mailto:ryan...@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can you link that? What
exactly were
>>>> they testing?
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at
2:36 PM
>>>> Robert Andrews
>>>> <i...@avantwireless.com
<mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>
>>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com
<mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Somehow they passed a
first
>>>> review from US DOD...
Can't be
>>>> all smoke
>>>> and mirrors in space...
>>>>
>>>> On 01/21/2020 12:18
PM, Ryan Ray
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > I'm still very wary
of this.
>>>> There seems to be a lot
of
>>>> over-promising
>>>> > under delivering. In
typical
>>>> Elon fashion, no
details but the
>>>> world runs
>>>> > with it and puts out
all these
>>>> data models that make
it seem
>>>> like the
>>>> > second coming of
christ.
>>>> Customer CPE is a
pizza box ufo
>>>> <$200 and they
>>>> > are starting in
2020, but
>>>> there's no pictures or
details.
>>>> How is that
>>>> > even possible? We're
buying
>>>> 450b at a more
expensive cost and
>>>> there
>>>> > ain't no phased
antenna with
>>>> motors in it.
>>>> >
>>>> > Then all you read
online is the
>>>> cult following of
spaceslax who
>>>> takes a
>>>> > twitter post as
gospel and just
>>>> keeps perpetuating the
same tired
>>>> > information.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020
at 10:02
>>>> AM Bill Prince
>>>> <part15...@gmail.com
<mailto:part15...@gmail.com>
>>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com <mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>
>>>> >
<mailto:part15...@gmail.com <mailto:part15...@gmail.com>
>>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com
<mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > If the SpaceX
Starlink
>>>> system works at 50% of
what it's
>>>> hyped, it will
>>>> > become the
future of rural
>>>> internet. Urban is
still going
>>>> to be
>>>> > dominated
(eventually) by
>>>> fiber for the
foreseeable future.
>>>> Higher
>>>> > speed
>>>> > wireless will be
very, very
>>>> local.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > bp
>>>> >
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>>> >
>>>> > On 1/19/2020
6:29 PM, Matt
>>>> Hoppes wrote:
>>>> > > I don’t know
why, but
>>>> this evening got me
thinking about
>>>> > broadband
delivery over the
>>>> past 30 years and the
future of
>>>> broadband.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > First we had
nothing,
>>>> then along came
dial-up and
>>>> that was
>>>> > amazing and many
companies
>>>> sprung up offering the
service.
>>>> Giants
>>>> > like AOL and
Prodigy.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Then DSL and
Cable came
>>>> along as well as
wireless and
>>>> dial-up has
>>>> > all but died.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Now DSL is
basically
>>>> dead, cable and
wireless have
>>>> gone through
>>>> > several
iterations and we
>>>> are seeing a push to
fiber.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > What’s the
possibility
>>>> in the next 10 years
cable and
>>>> wireless
>>>> > will be dead
technologies
>>>> with fiber at the fore
front?
>>>> Possibly.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > But then.....
is fiber
>>>> really future proof?
We are
>>>> talking about
>>>> > investing
hundreds of
>>>> millions into fiber
>>>> infrastructure, because
>>>> > it’s “the
future”. But is
>>>> it?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > So far every
technology
>>>> delivery mechanism to
date has
>>>> become
>>>> > obsolete in as
little as
>>>> 6-10 years.
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > AF mailing list
>>>> > AF@af.afmug.com
<mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
>>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
>>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
>>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>>
>>>> >
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> AF mailing list
>>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
>>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> AF mailing list
>>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
>>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Darin Steffl
>>>>
>>>> Minnesota WiFi
>>>>
>>>> www.mnwifi.com <http://www.mnwifi.com>
<http://www.mnwifi.com/>
>>>>
>>>> 507-634-WiFi
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>>> Like us on Facebook
>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>>>
>>>> -- AF mailing list
>>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
<mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Carl Peterson
>>>>
>>>> *PORT NETWORKS*
>>>>
>>>> 401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553
>>>>
>>>> Baltimore, MD 21202
>>>>
>>>> (410) 637-3707
>>>>
>>>> -- AF mailing list
>>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
<mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>
>>>> -- AF mailing list
>>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
<mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> -- AF mailing list
>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
<mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>
>>>
>>
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com <http://www.mnwifi.com/>
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
