5 ms·
I've had Starlink deployed for a client since mid-January or so up around the 45th parallel (near the US/Canadian border). Installed it in a brisk -20 windchill
by xoa 5y ago
I've had Starlink deployed for a client since mid-January or so up around the 45th parallel (near the US/Canadian border). Installed it in a brisk -20 windchill too, good times. That was kind of a best place replacement scenario even early beta, as their previous solution was a 10/2 connection that cost >$200/month, so Starlink didn't have to be stellar to beat the competition there. I was able to place it with zero obstructions. This was never used with the native router which just stayed unopened in the box, it was right into a OPNsense gateway. We left the old landline connection up for a few months with Starlink as primary and the old one as a failover. For the first month and a half or so, there were regular dropouts every day, though only for a minute or two. That noticeably dropped over the course of March, and we dumped the previous service by mid-April. Overall experience has been excellent for wireless, as good as a high quality WISP despite the much greater technical challenges. And it's continued to improve: as well as latency and uptime, bandwidth u/d has increased from around 100-130/10-30 to nearly always 220-250/30-45. At no extra price. Tell me the last time you got that from an ISP ;).
Overall experience is similar to this review, a few observations following along the review:
>Hard cable
This is annoying, but my perspective is coming from someone who does a lot of network termination and has thousands of dollars in fluke testing gear, rolls of cat8 cable and certified jacks and so on which is obviously absolutely not the norm. I needed it to go farther, but I ended up just plugging the 802.3bt injector it comes with into fiber optic anyway which thus also gave me guaranteed isolation from the rest of the network without having to worry about grounding. I suspect once it's in full service and they start to branch out they'll do a "Business Class" version or something aimed at more advanced deployments.
>Your own router
This does work fine. In order to get statistics though you'll need to static route 192.168.100.1. It's not needed for it to operate, but probably still a good idea. Lots of instructions around on the net for that. When I first set it up, IPv6 was still wonky whether you had your own router or not. Easily worked around with a permanent WireGuard tunnel for a VLAN to a cheap VPS with a static IP. Anything that needs a static IP can just get put there.
>Power consumption
Real, but as the article said in the context of rural internet pricing it's frankly fairly meaningless. Effectively means it's $105-115/month which is still so much frigging better than most options available at the speed that it's plenty competitive. If we had fiber we'd use it, but we don't.
>Latency
Where that will REALLY get interesting is once intersat optical links go live constellation-wide (can't remember the timeline on that, v0.9 for polar went up last year, I think they're now on new ones going forward). Most latency tests are local hops only, which is relevant of course and Starlink will always be at a disadvantage for. But once you start cross continents or oceans, Starlink definitely has the potential to easily beat many people's fiber connections (particularly rural ones its aimed at). CDNs are a lot, but not everything. It'll be cool to see how that affects the market.
>it's potential to increase the risk of the Kessler syndrome
This is a meme, not reality. I wish it would stop coming up. Starlink sats are in quite Low Earth Orbit (LEO), and the majority of the constellation yet to be launched will be V-band ones in V(ery)LEO. At those altitudes, natural orbital decay will eliminate debris or sats even if they fail, and if they don't they deorbit themselves. SpaceX has thought this through, part of the delay on optics was specifically figuring out how to make sure they'd all burn up.
Other planned megaconstellations higher up do indeed represent more concern, but Starlink does not. SpaceX is leveraging its overwhelming and soon to grow more-so advantage in launch capability and economics in a host of self-reinforcing ways, and this is one of them. They get to lean on higher numbers and faster replacement to get more performance and stop Kessler risk.
>Astronomy
They've been working on shading them to reduce apparent magnitude, but that only fully works when sats are fully deployed and the trains going up are there. Even reduced magnitude will still affect some instruments and observations. I'm afraid though astronomy is just going to have to deal with that for a decade, looking forward to major development of cheap space based industry allowing lunar/space telescopes like never before eventually supplanting ground-based entirely. Cold comfort to a few who really will be messed up at a point in their careers that will be awkward for that, but this is frankly more important.
>Other
This will be MIND BLOWING FOR MARINE/AEROSPACE. If you think your rural connection is bad go look at merchant marine pricing. Aircraft too obviously, but one area I think many people haven't thought about yet is the potential for other satellites themselves. SpaceX is really setting themselves up as a major space infrastructure company.
- geerlingguy 5y ago>> it's potential to increase the risk of the Kessler syndrome > This is a meme, not reality. I wish it would stop coming up. I do too, but since that's probably the first or second most prevalent thing that people mention in response to anything not completely negative on Starlink, I figured I'd give it a mention.
- spookthesunset 5y ago> CDNs are a lot, but not everything So how much hardware would be required to put the CDN on the satellite? Like, if the CDN was for popular video sites like youtube or netflix?
- sudhirj 5y agoTry an google image search for Netflix Open Connect appliance. Basically a 2U / 4U rack mountable server. Need to put a few of those in orbit.
- qayxc 5y ago> This is a meme, not reality. I wish it would stop coming up. Kessler syndrome has begun decades ago. The question is not whether it happens, but whether mega-constellations have the potential to make it significantly worse. So it's not a meme at all, but a question whether it's a relevant concern in the context of Starlink. At a failure rate of ~3% [0] this would be relevant, but as the failure rate has dropped significantly since and the company aims for 1%, it probably isn't. [0] https://phys.org/news/2020-10-starlink-satellites.html https://phys.org/news/2020-10-starlink-satellites.html
- xoa 5y ago>but a question whether it's a relevant concern in the context of Starlink I kind of thought it was pretty obvious that my statement was specifically in the context of Starlink, given that I explicitly acknowledged that higher up megaconstellations are a much bigger concern. But it's not at all to a significant degree for Starlink due to orbital decay by atmospheric drag. Have to get above 550-600km or so for unpowered lifetimes to really start to stretch out. You might find this Gabbard diagram animation very interesting as a visualization: https://old.reddit.com/r/space/comments/ld4vlq/gabbard_diagram_animation_of_space_debris_since/ https://old.reddit.com/r/space/comments/ld4vlq/gabbard_diagr... It shows all the altitudes against period of all tracked space debris since 1959. Watch what happens around the 550-600km mark in terms of decay acceleration. Starlink, particularly the VLEO ones that are planned to form the majority of the constellation when completed, is essentially passive failsafe. Planned deorbit is still much better than a 1-5 year lifetime of course, but neither will it ever just block us off or render an orbit unusable because they're just plain too low. Anything below those marks (like ISS) requires regular active reboosts to maintain their orbits. When ISS wants to get rid of trash, they can literally just let it go in a big brick. Kessler absolutely is worth worrying about very much at altitude. But a lot of the coverage and stuff getting shared around about it are 100% backwards. They focus purely on raw numbers of sats. But the absolute best way to avoid Kessler is to go low for as many things as possible, which by definition requires more, cheaper sats that get replaced much more regularly. Massive VLEO constellations are a good thing for space debris not a bad one, because they require both active boosting and even aerodynamics to stay up, and even a worst case direct collision of two sats at ~300km say would result in complete elimination of all debris within at most a month. Starship will make lower altitudes and more safety systems economically feasible.