On 12/26/20 11:49 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:
The thing is that the pandemic has changed the game on the ground:
there is an actual feature differentiator to be had. But having dealt
with the Linksys folks in the past I don't put out much hope that
they'll take advantage of it. The software development side was a
vast black hole where time stands still. It seems the entire industry
is like that.
Michael,
Even 100 Mbps Internet is fine for Zoom, as long as the uplink speed
is at least 10 Mbps. The average zoom session requires 2 Mbps up and
down, and even for the lavish six-screen executive sessions, 6 Mbps is
plenty good. So arguing that 10 GbE is necessary because “pandemic has
changed the game on the ground” is silly.
https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/204003179-System-requirements-for-Zoom-Rooms#h_b48c2bfd-7da0-4290-aae8-784270d3ab3f
<https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/204003179-System-requirements-for-Zoom-Rooms#h_b48c2bfd-7da0-4290-aae8-784270d3ab3f>
So, sorry, 10 GbE is a hobbyists fantasy, not a marketable product. If
hobbyists want 10GbE, let them pay for it like the rest of us, and let
them play CoD from inside freezing data center :)
I'm not saying anything about 10G, other than my initial query as to
whether any residence could possibly need that much bandwidth. But
buffer bloat is a problem with a lot of us still stuck on DSL with no
prospect of anything better. It's not the bandwidth per se, it is how
the bandwidth is consumed at home. Better queuing disciplines than tail
drop with a gigantic queue could help zoom meetings a lot where
bandwidth is more constrained. And regardless of bandwidth, huge queues
are not good for real time traffic for anything. You'd think that gamers
would be acutely aware of this and create a market for routers that
cater to their hunger for less latency.
Mike
