Hi Doc,
> On Jan 9, 2023, at 16:45, Doc Searls via Starlink > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Experience is also based on expectation, and nearly all the ISPs advertise > downstream speed, and compete on that. [SM] My experience when in southern CA was that there was little true competition, in my case only charter delivered anything above ADSL at all. But sure they advertised "up to XX Mbps". > This state of things reminds me of the TV business in the 50s and 60s, when > RCA, GE and Zenith competed on picture size (21 inches was tops) more than > picture quality. (Sony changed the game with Trinitron in 1968.) So everybody > naturally assumes that the quality of their Internet service is almost > entirely a matter of downstream speed. > > While there is now a widespread understanding that fiber is best, some ISPs > talk a fiber game but actually do hybrid fiber coax, delivering essentially > coax's asymmetrical speeds. My sister has that with her "fiber" AT&T service > in North Carolina, and I have it here in Santa Barbara with Cox.Neither are > bad, but neither are FTTH. [SM] I am less discriminating, if an ISP can deliver sufficiently low latency/jitter and high enough throughput, I could not care less whether this is via photons in glass or via rfc1149 avian carriers. > > Until the ISPs begin to promote and compete on some kind of normative metric > for QoE (or other initialism), customers will continue to think by default > that downstream speed is the whole game. [SM] That is an issue best not left to the ISPs... in Germany the national network regulatory agency (based on EU rules) defined a mandatory set of numbers ISPs need to give to end users pre-sale and created a method with which consumers can control whether the contracted rates are actually delivered. These numbers contain three different quality grades for up- and download respectively (out of the three one is more important the "normally available data transfer rate"). However where the so far have dropped the ball completely is in regards to latency. (To illustrate how badly, the same agency recently defined the minimum internet quality consumers are "guaranteed", but somehow considered RTTs (the the agencies reference servers in Frankfurt) of <= 150ms as acceptable)... > An interesting thing with Starlink is that people in rural areas migrating > off the likes of HughesNet care more about latency (or the experience of its > relative absence) than any other factor. Example: > https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/t5rx0s/switching_from_hughesnet/ [SM] Given the large propagation delay for geostationary orbits, as well as prices and volume caps, I am not amazed that (at least for some) current GEO users LEO seems $DEITY-sent. Regards Sebastian > > Doc > >> On Jan 9, 2023, at 6:50 AM, Livingood, Jason via Starlink >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> AFAIK, quality of service (QoS) refers to network characteristics you >> can measure quantitatively without human opinion being involved, i.e.: >> throughput, latency and packet losses, also availability (MTBF/(MTBF + >> MTTR)). Then, quality of experience (QoE) refers to what the users >> experience, it is subjective, it must be done using subjects that are >> not engineers or telecom technicians, and it is defined by the ITU as >> the MOS (Mean Opinion Score), in Recommendation ITU-T P.800.1. >> >> ISTM that everyone has a different view of QoS & QoE. My view is that QoS >> refers to DSCP marking and such (so best effort, priority, less than best >> effort, etc.) and/or some metric that the *network* is configured to >> deliver. But...these are all proxies for end user QoE, which used to be >> difficult to measure individually but is now easy/affordable to do at scale. >> IMO all that really matters is the end user experience, and that can be >> quantitatively measured (link capacity at peak hour, responsiveness/working >> latency, uptime) and qualitatively measured. After all, the end user does >> not care about what the network is in theory configured to delivery but only >> their actual experience using the Internet. __ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink _______________________________________________ Starlink mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
