Re: 60ms cross continent
Mark Tinka wrote: It's just that with more and more stuff being loaded on to IP (not to mention, good ol' IPTV), Good. does it make sense for broadcasters to upgrade satellite infrastructure and decoders to support 1080p, 4K, 8K, 16K, e.t.c., when all you need is an app and an Internet connection for the very same (if not better) quality? There is a jump of logic. First, we should have STBes to generate not decoded video signal over HDMI but encoded video over IP over Ethernet. Though IP packets may be carried to anywhere, which makes regional restrictions meaningless, (re-encoded) decoded video can be carried by IP anyway. We should also use IP even over radio waves. IP over MPEG2-TS over DVB (or terrestrial broadcast network) is doable though IP directly over DVB should be better. Not to mention, considerations for eyeball time in the fight between the linear TV and VoD? Unicast video over satellite link costs a lot. Masataka Ohta
Re: 60ms cross continent
Proprietary startups for M2M in most of cases bad idea, especially if they require custom hardware (those operate in VHF band). And with such history:> https://www.satellitetoday.com/government-military/2019/10/18/swarm-receives-fcc-approval-to-launch-150-satellites/ Here is example, Sigfox in UK seems powered by startup, and startup went defunct: https://twitter.com/cybergibbons/status/1280892048787243008 And my own experience, if you embed in your design proprietary modem, it will be very pricey to replace it, if startup fail to reach profit margin. I rather will trust technologies based on open standards, like FossaSat or Lacuna, often they are built with terrestrial fallback, and in fact you can build your own gateways, if required. And more than that, some modules, like Murata, support both Sigfox + LoRaWAN, and technically possible to support LoRa satellites as well at same time, without significant hardware mods. On 2020-07-09 05:56, Mike Lyon wrote: For the IoT/M2M stuff that doesn’t require huge amounts of data, there is a Silicon Valley startup that is deploying cube sats for just that. Swarm Technologies https://www.swarm.space/ -Mike
Re: 60ms cross continent
On 9/Jul/20 18:00, Christopher Munz-Michielin wrote: > I'd assume it's a question of available bandwidth and availability of > decoders. From my observations most HD satellite feeds seem to sit > between 3 and 5 mbps, a typical Ku band transponder might have a > bandwidth of around 20-25mbps. This means you can cram 5-8 HD feeds > onto a single transponder. With 4K streams the bandwidth requirements > double, meaning you can cram a lot less in the same amount of > transponder space and satellite bandwidth is expensive! > > The other issue is on the decoder side. Right now, the vast majority > of satellite subscribers receive programming though dedicated decoders > (set top boxes). Most of these decoders only have hardware to decode > MPEG2 and H.264 video, while 4K stuff is almost exclusively H.265. > That means it's not a simple matter of turning on 4K, you'd have to > arrange to send new decoders to all your subscribers wanting to > receive 4K. > > As time moves along, I'm sure we'll start to see more satellite feeds > available in 4K but like the transition to HD video, it'll be a slow > process. The above are all the reasons I've been positing as well. It's just that with more and more stuff being loaded on to IP (not to mention, good ol' IPTV), does it make sense for broadcasters to upgrade satellite infrastructure and decoders to support 1080p, 4K, 8K, 16K, e.t.c., when all you need is an app and an Internet connection for the very same (if not better) quality? Not to mention, considerations for eyeball time in the fight between the linear TV and VoD? Mark.
Re: 60ms cross continent
On 9/Jul/20 17:51, Joel M Snyder wrote: > Oh man I wish that were wholly true... Satellite/VSAT has another very > very important attribute: it's not subject to the whims of the local > government or regulators. So when there's an election or some unrest or > coup or the prime minister has very bad flatulence, and some person says > "turn off the Internet," your non-terrestrial connection is there so > that you can continue to do business. Very true, except there are still a few countries that require a single operator to have all "gateway" access out of the country, even via satellite. So yes, install, for sure. But if someone does the rounds and catches an "unlicensed" installation, that could be interesting. > (Plus, there are also still many places outside of capital cities in the > world where the Internet is truly awful and if you want bits, you have > to bring your own) I did mention that use-case, already, in a previous post. Simple applications such as ATM's in remote locations is still quite typical. Mark.
Re: 60ms cross continent
On 09/07/2020 08:00, Mark Tinka wrote: So is there a reason why we are not seeing widespread 1080p TV via satellite? They seem to exist where a broadcaster also supports an IPTV platform. Mark. I'd assume it's a question of available bandwidth and availability of decoders. From my observations most HD satellite feeds seem to sit between 3 and 5 mbps, a typical Ku band transponder might have a bandwidth of around 20-25mbps. This means you can cram 5-8 HD feeds onto a single transponder. With 4K streams the bandwidth requirements double, meaning you can cram a lot less in the same amount of transponder space and satellite bandwidth is expensive! The other issue is on the decoder side. Right now, the vast majority of satellite subscribers receive programming though dedicated decoders (set top boxes). Most of these decoders only have hardware to decode MPEG2 and H.264 video, while 4K stuff is almost exclusively H.265. That means it's not a simple matter of turning on 4K, you'd have to arrange to send new decoders to all your subscribers wanting to receive 4K. As time moves along, I'm sure we'll start to see more satellite feeds available in 4K but like the transition to HD video, it'll be a slow process. Chris
Re: 60ms cross continent
On Jul 8, 2020, at 3:05 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: >Satellite earth stations are not irrelevant, however. They still do get >used to provide satellite-based TV services, and can also be used for >media houses who need to hook up to their network to broadcast video >when reporting in the region (even though uploading a raw file back >home over the Internet is where the tech. has now gone). Oh man I wish that were wholly true... Satellite/VSAT has another very very important attribute: it's not subject to the whims of the local government or regulators. So when there's an election or some unrest or coup or the prime minister has very bad flatulence, and some person says "turn off the Internet," your non-terrestrial connection is there so that you can continue to do business. Right now I'm in the middle of a project installing more than 300 VSATs, replacing an incumbent provider, and the rationale for all that money and all that equipment and all that work is "the bits must flow." (Plus, there are also still many places outside of capital cities in the world where the Internet is truly awful and if you want bits, you have to bring your own) jms -- Joel M Snyder, 1404 East Lind Road, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Senior Partner, Opus One Phone: +1 520 324 0494 j...@opus1.comhttp://www.opus1.com/jms
Re: 60ms cross continent
On 9/Jul/20 16:51, Christopher Munz-Michielin wrote: > > There are a few 4K test streams. NASA TV is one: > > https://www.lyngsat.com/tvchannels/us/NASA-TV-UHD.html > > I just piped it into ffmpeg and the NASA TV feed runs 10-15mbps, H.265 > encoding at a resolution of 3840x2160. So definitely possible to push > greater then 1080 video. So is there a reason why we are not seeing widespread 1080p TV via satellite? They seem to exist where a broadcaster also supports an IPTV platform. Mark.
Re: 60ms cross continent
On 09/07/2020 05:34, Mark Tinka wrote: Does anyone know of (m)any satellite TV services delivering 1080p or greater? The most I've seen on our side of the rock is 1080i. If there is an inherent commercial restriction in how many pixels we can grab over satellite at scale, it might be tricky for some markets that demand 1080p, 4K, or greater, for linear TV. Mark. There are a few 4K test streams. NASA TV is one: https://www.lyngsat.com/tvchannels/us/NASA-TV-UHD.html I just piped it into ffmpeg and the NASA TV feed runs 10-15mbps, H.265 encoding at a resolution of 3840x2160. So definitely possible to push greater then 1080 video. Chris
Re: L2VPN/L2transport, Cumulus Linux & hardware suggestion
The EX 4650 does indeed do 25G. Chris From: NANOG Date: Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 16:10 To: Jürgen Jaritsch , nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: L2VPN/L2transport, Cumulus Linux & hardware suggestion Good luck with tunnelling LACP, no matter what boxes you have - LACP has (de facto) hard jitter requirements of under 1msec, or you'll be getting TCP resets coming out your ears due to mis-ordered packets. For your requirements, although I hesitate to recommend them for enterprise/carrier use, Miktotik's EoIP protocol does a much better job of this than most "carrier-grade" implementations. Otherwise, Juniper and Arista both come to mind, Juniper has the EX4650 that matches your h/w specs, and Arista has, oh, at least half a dozen boxes of various spec that comply, too. Not 100% sure the Juniper EX does 25G, now that I think of it. Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services MERLIN 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athomp...@merlin.mb.ca https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.merlin.mb.ca=E,1,o0s1bKhLRD6liZS4E7uqx8L_J041eQu7PxSKcDhFF789AA4epdh0jA2ocQb3Muy1lOflaqq0cDB0hNdzN8eaUymLeSEkUXcpEIsdt7KL5XEHOMQ,=1 > -Original Message- > From: NANOG On Behalf Of > Jürgen Jaritsch > Sent: Tuesday, July 7, 2020 3:15 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: L2VPN/L2transport, Cumulus Linux & hardware suggestion > > Dear folks, > > have anyone already tried to run VXLAN/EVPN + “Bridge Layer 2 Protocol > Tunneling” on Cumulus Linux as an replacement for classic MPLS L2VPN/VPWS > (“xconnect”, l2circuit, VLL) ? > > I need to provide transparent Ethernet P2P virtual leased lines to my > customers and these have to support stuff like LLDP, STP, LACP, etc. The > transport L2 network is not THAT big: max hops between VTEP is 4. > > Anyone have suggestions for the below hardware request? > #) 1-3U L2/L3 box > #) 48x SFP28 / 1/10/25G > #) 6x QSFP28 / 100G > #) VXLAN/EVPN with L2 tunneling support > or > #) MPLS VPWS/l2circuit > #) Dual PSU > > > thanks & best regards > Jürgen >
Re: 60ms cross continent
On 9/Jul/20 04:47, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote: > > I don't think traditional satellites have much future as backbone. > Only as broadcasting media. Does anyone know of (m)any satellite TV services delivering 1080p or greater? The most I've seen on our side of the rock is 1080i. If there is an inherent commercial restriction in how many pixels we can grab over satellite at scale, it might be tricky for some markets that demand 1080p, 4K, or greater, for linear TV. Mark.
Re: L2VPN/L2transport, Cumulus Linux & hardware suggestion
On 09.07.2020 02.14, Valdis Klētnieks wrote: There's a difference between a TCP *resend*, and a *RESET*. Triggering a resend on a re-order is reasonably sane, sending an RST isn't You get the RESETs from people that do anycast when your broken ECMP hashing splits the packets between multiple upstream providers. This might cause parts of your TCP stream to end up at entirely different destinations. Probably not going to happen with LACP but these things are related and often use the same knops in the configuration. Regards, Baldur
