3 ms·

Satellites will never fix the broadband penetration problem. There are fundamental laws of physics in the way. If you can change those, let me know. If you wan

Satellites will never fix the broadband penetration problem. There are fundamental laws of physics in the way. If you can change those, let me know. If you want to solve broadband adoption, you have to get Congress to stop allowing broadband companies to lie through their teeth.

mehrdadn 8y ago
For anyone else curious... geostationary orbits run at an altitude of 22,236 miles or 120ms. Double that for round-trip and bump it by a bit more for the angle and I'd expect pings >= 300ms on top of the delays in the electronics.
- throwaway190102 8y ago
  That's a lot better than existing sat based solutions. if the throughput could get close to 4g speeds I'd see it as a legitimate contender, but there are still some applications it will never really be viable for unless you can build some sort of network of the things and circumvent most of the terrestrial network entirely until you get really close to the destination, But even with that I doubt it could get much better.
- jerrysievert 8y ago
  current satellite internet is also in geostationary orbit (22k miles): IP Gateway REDACTED Packet Loss 0% Average Delay 621 ms Minimum Delay 570 ms Maximum Delay 650 ms that's to satellite. here's a traceroute to show you actual times: traceroute to 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 10.0.1.1 1.941 ms 0.933 ms 0.930 ms 2 192.168.42.1 2.535 ms 1.232 ms 1.313 ms 3 redacted 2.668 ms 1.366 ms 2.584 ms 4 67.45.0.65 601.534 ms 569.407 ms 600.134 ms 5 67.45.5.5 1483.616 ms 615.166 ms 620.347 ms i managed to get this low of traceroute times as the clouds happened to be gone for the moment, but given that i live in the nw, that is a fluke :) an article on LEO options from SpaceX notes the same latency: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/spacex-plans-worldwide-satellite-internet-with-low-latency-gigabit-speed/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/space... i'd love something as low as 300ms (or the 25ms that LEO is promising), but it's just not going to happen.
  - plopz 8y ago
    Why don't you think the lower latency LEO is going to happen?
    - jerrysievert 8y ago
      ah, my note was that i'd love something as low as the 300ms that math seems to think we'd have, and the 25ms that LEO should provide - that's where my skepticism lies. as for whether an LEO solution will occur for rural americans? the monetary math for that doesn't make much more sense to me, but lots of things get deployed that don't make monetary sense so that's at least possible.
s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
What about low orbit satellites?
C1sc0cat 8y ago
Local Loop Unbundling is the way to go

mehrdadn 8y ago

For anyone else curious... geostationary orbits run at an altitude of 22,236 miles or 120ms. Double that for round-trip and bump it by a bit more for the angle and I'd expect pings >= 300ms on top of the delays in the electronics.

throwaway190102 8y ago
That's a lot better than existing sat based solutions. if the throughput could get close to 4g speeds I'd see it as a legitimate contender, but there are still some applications it will never really be viable for unless you can build some sort of network of the things and circumvent most of the terrestrial network entirely until you get really close to the destination, But even with that I doubt it could get much better.
jerrysievert 8y ago
current satellite internet is also in geostationary orbit (22k miles): IP Gateway REDACTED Packet Loss 0% Average Delay 621 ms Minimum Delay 570 ms Maximum Delay 650 ms that's to satellite. here's a traceroute to show you actual times: traceroute to 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 10.0.1.1 1.941 ms 0.933 ms 0.930 ms 2 192.168.42.1 2.535 ms 1.232 ms 1.313 ms 3 redacted 2.668 ms 1.366 ms 2.584 ms 4 67.45.0.65 601.534 ms 569.407 ms 600.134 ms 5 67.45.5.5 1483.616 ms 615.166 ms 620.347 ms i managed to get this low of traceroute times as the clouds happened to be gone for the moment, but given that i live in the nw, that is a fluke :) an article on LEO options from SpaceX notes the same latency: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/spacex-plans-worldwide-satellite-internet-with-low-latency-gigabit-speed/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/space... i'd love something as low as 300ms (or the 25ms that LEO is promising), but it's just not going to happen.
- plopz 8y ago
  Why don't you think the lower latency LEO is going to happen?
  - jerrysievert 8y ago
    ah, my note was that i'd love something as low as the 300ms that math seems to think we'd have, and the 25ms that LEO should provide - that's where my skepticism lies. as for whether an LEO solution will occur for rural americans? the monetary math for that doesn't make much more sense to me, but lots of things get deployed that don't make monetary sense so that's at least possible.

s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago

What about low orbit satellites?

C1sc0cat 8y ago

Local Loop Unbundling is the way to go