Yeah, that makes sense. I've never used DirecTV on demand myself, so I
don't know what it does. I did do some testing with DirecTV now when it
first came out, and it seemed to work more or less like Netflix.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 5:36 PM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
> I think the problem with DirecTV on demand is that unlike Netflix it has
> no adaptive video quality. It’s 5 Mbps or nothing. Actually if it tests
> that the connection can’t deliver 5 Mbps, you get a message that your
> Internet is too slow to watch now and you’ll have to download to your DVR
> and watch later. Which shouldn’t actually be that bad, except everybody
> these days is like a kid with no ability for delayed gratification.
> Download and watch later? You’ve got to be kidding. I want my movie, and
> I want it now.
>
>
>
> I’m not sure what DirecTV does if you start watching and then someone else
> in the house starts using some of the bandwidth.
>
>
>
> Also there are other offerings like DirecTV Now or AT&T Now or whatever
> the latest name for their OTT service is, I assume that is a little more
> like Netflix and Hulu, or it really would suck.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Friday, January 24, 2020 5:04 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] The Future
>
>
>
> Same here. At one point, we just started telling people that DirecTV stuff
> doesn't work with our service... although I haven't heard of any of those
> recently, so it may not be as bad as it used to be.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:54 PM Robert Andrews <i...@avantwireless.com>
> wrote:
>
> We find the worst is DirecTV. More problems when customers are trying
> to download their services over internet than any others.
>
>
>
> On 01/24/2020 10:11 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
> > Yeah, Netflix ability to switch video quality / stream rate on the fly
> is actually pretty awesome. I know we all used to bitch about Netflix, but
> now I actually hold it up as the gold standard. Does Netflix work? OK,
> your Internet works. If flavor of the week streaming service doesn't work
> as good as Netflix, well, there you go.
> >
> > I also like that Netflix traffic is usually identifiable because an rDNS
> lookup on the IP address returns something.ntflxvideo.net rather than
> some anonymous CDN or nothing at all. So if you are torching a customer's
> traffic to tell him what is maxing out his connection, it takes just a few
> seconds to say it's Netflix.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Bill Prince
> > Sent: Friday, January 24, 2020 12:04 PM
> > To: af@af.afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] The Future
> >
> > A few years ago, I did some testing with Netflix. I found that it would
> "function" down to just under 700 Kbps. For SD quality, about double that,
> or 1.5 Mbps. For HD, you needed a bit more than double that, or about 3
> Mbps.
> >
> > I did some more recent tests with Prime. It would consume 5-10 Mbps if
> you let it, but I found that it would "function" down to about 2 Mbps.
> > This function was roughly the same as Netflix SD quality.
> >
> > I periodically throttle all of them, just to see what the effects will
> be. To date, Netflix does the best, and is even able to switch CODECs
> mid-stream most of the time. The rest, not so much.
> >
> >
> > bp
> > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
> >
> > On 1/24/2020 9:37 AM, Robert Andrews wrote:
> >> That's basically what I tell all my RV friends that are on the road
> >> complaining about streaming. Solves most of their problems at all
> >> the weird places...
> >>
> >> On 01/23/2020 01:17 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
> >>> Yeah, last I looked that's what they said the lowest quality needed.
> >>> A few years back I did some testing with various speeds, and I think
> >>> I got down to somewhere around 500k before Netflix would break. But
> >>> even then, the picture quality was getting pretty ugly.
> >>>
> >>> But seriously... if Netflix defaulted to lower quality (not lowest,
> >>> but in the middle), and made you set it higher if you wanted, most
> >>> people would never know or care... and it'd save a lot of bandwidth.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:14 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I'm pretty sure the lowest quality level on Netflix needs 0.7
> >>> mbps. If your rule ended up giving them 256k+512k then it would
> >>> have worked.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 1/23/2020 4:10 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
> >>>> Way back in the day, when powercode had the old type queue, we
> >>>> built our basic one to buffer at 512 long enough to maintain a 2
> >>>> hour sd stream at 256k with periodic 512k bucket refills. so
> >>>> really it was 512k effectively. It may very vell be that
> >>>> expectations of "standard" definition were different back then.
> >>>> but I thought that was an actual resolution standard
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:58 PM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com
> >>>> <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I don’t remember ever being able to stream Netflix on 256K.
> >>>> 1M maybe, and 1.5M still gives you decent SD. You’re going
> >>>> to
> >>>> need at least 2.5M though for HD. So that’s one part of the
> >>>> answer is HD. Some streaming services, like DirecTV On
> >>>> Demand,
> >>>> don’t have adaptive video quality and want a minimum of 5M
> >>>> to
> >>>> stream. Another factor is “live” video, which is compressed
> >>>> on-the-fly and probably not as efficiently as pre-recorded
> >>>> content.
> >>>>
> >>>> Of course, if the customer has more, video streams will
> >>>> happily use it.
> >>>>
> >>>> *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com
> >>>> <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com>> *On Behalf Of *Steve Jones
> >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, January 23, 2020 2:29 PM
> >>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com
> >>>> <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>>
> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] The Future
> >>>>
> >>>> we are at the end of the wireless backhaul road. when I
> >>>> started 15 or so years ago, we were just moving off a
> >>>> handdful of random T1s to a bonded 6mb circuit backhauling
> >>>> that was nothing. Now we have two gig circuits on separate
> >>>> parts of our network, and we are a tiny WISP in podunk USA..
> >>>> We dont put less than 1.2gbps backhauls in for core
> >>>> backhauls
> >>>> now. The existing technology for distance in a single unit
> >>>> us
> >>>> roughly 2gbps when trying to cover any distance of merit.
> >>>> Sure
> >>>> you can do more than that, you can cheat outside link
> >>>> budgets
> >>>> and ignore your rain region. But if youre talking about most
> >>>> temperate region backhauls with legitimate reliability thats
> >>>> the wall.
> >>>>
> >>>> we keep poking a little more bits/hz out, but that not
> >>>> really
> >>>> new tech, its all dependent upon smaller and smaller path
> >>>> budgets, that eventually wont be attainable. so you have to
> >>>> start doing shorter shots, with more radios, more channel
> >>>> size, etc. eventually you hit the point where its no longer
> >>>> economically viable to keep throwing radio and lease costs
> >>>> at
> >>>> it and youll have to put glass in the dirt.
> >>>>
> >>>> Duct is whats future proof, fiber is just the current best
> >>>> long term option for transport. pending some breakthrough
> >>>> tech, its the only real long term cost effective future
> >>>> proofish option.
> >>>>
> >>>> We will hit a wall on demand at some point in the near term
> >>>> as
> >>>> we run out of things to connect.
> >>>>
> >>>> Can anybody answer why 256k used to be able to deliver a
> >>>> decent SD netflix stream and now i need multiple mbps for
> >>>> the
> >>>> same thing? asking for a friend
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:40 PM Carl Peterson
> >>>> <cpeter...@portnetworks.com
> >>>> <mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> "Elon started it as a project to raise money, yes.
> >>>> Morgan
> >>>> Stanley is up valuing it because they don't understand
> >>>> technology. This project is not even close to spacex's
> >>>> purpose for existing. If it disappeared it would not
> >>>> have
> >>>> any real effect on their overall mission."
> >>>>
> >>>> This isn't really true. There was one primary driver.
> >>>>
> >>>> 1) You need to bring down the cost of launch
> >>>> considerably
> >>>> in order to expand the launch market to a size where
> >>>> developing and maintaining a reusable rocket fleet makes
> >>>> sense but you can't bring down the cost of launch till
> >>>> you
> >>>> have customers to fill the launch manifest and that
> >>>> spool
> >>>> up will take years. SpaceX thinks they have solved this
> >>>> by
> >>>> becoming their own customer for all their extra launch
> >>>> capacity for the foreseeable future.
> >>>>
> >>>> When they looked at #1 above they realized that there
> >>>> was
> >>>> a huge potential market there and even a a few % of the
> >>>> global internet market could be a cash cow for years to
> >>>> come.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:13 PM Jason McKemie
> >>>> <j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com
> >>>> <mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Elon started it as a project to raise money, yes.
> >>>> Morgan Stanley is up valuing it because they don't
> >>>> understand technology. This project is not even
> >>>> close
> >>>> to spacex's purpose for existing. If it disappeared
> >>>> it
> >>>> would not have any real effect on their overall
> >>>> mission.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2020, Robert
> >>>> <i...@avantwireless.com
> >>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> um, no, Starlink is now becoming the primary
> >>>> reason for the huge run-up in valuation for
> >>>> SpaceX...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-future-multibillion-dollar-va
> >>>> luation-starlink-internet-morgan-stanley-2019-9
> >>>>
> >>>> On 1/21/20 4:15 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> The difference being that this is a side
> >>>> project for one of the main businesses, not
> >>>> their primary purpose. At best I don't think
> >>>> this is going to be anything besides a
> >>>> better
> >>>> alternative to other satellite internet
> >>>> options.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2020, Darin Steffl
> >>>> <darin.ste...@mnwifi.com
> >>>> <mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Guys, lots of misinformation here.
> >>>>
> >>>> They are NO plans nor hints of
> >>>> integrating
> >>>> Starlink antennas into Tesla cars. It
> >>>> may
> >>>> happen but no one has hinted of this
> >>>> happening. All Tesla's have 3G or 4G
> >>>> modems already built-in to them along
> >>>> with
> >>>> WiFi. Updates are sent via WiFi first
> >>>> and
> >>>> after the fleet has received the
> >>>> updates,
> >>>> they eventually push it to cars via
> >>>> cellular data that haven't updated via
> >>>> WiFi.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regarding B2B backhaul, I don't believe
> >>>> you'll see this as an option anytime
> >>>> soon
> >>>> for WISP's or other ISP's. They're
> >>>> targeting residential and small
> >>>> businesses
> >>>> as well as government contracts. The
> >>>> cost
> >>>> if they did offer B2B backhaul services
> >>>> would likely be higher than fiber to
> >>>> your
> >>>> network. Please stop thinking this will
> >>>> happen as I bet it will not.
> >>>>
> >>>> They may offer a self install option but
> >>>> they'll also have a contractor to
> >>>> perform
> >>>> most installs for a cost is my guess.
> >>>> Maybe they'll send a self install kit
> >>>> for
> >>>> X price and if you can't get it working,
> >>>> they'll schedule a contract install for
> >>>> XX
> >>>> price.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'll also say that you should not doubt
> >>>> Elon's passion to achieve great things.
> >>>> I
> >>>> have a Tesla and it's a work of art and
> >>>> by
> >>>> far the best vehicle I've ever driven.
> >>>> 99%
> >>>> of people who have driven one also think
> >>>> this. Tesla is succeeding, SpaceX is on
> >>>> it's way there, The Boring Company is
> >>>> half
> >>>> done with their Vegas tunnel, and
> >>>> Starlink
> >>>> will likely be a viable competitor for
> us.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:48 PM Ryan Ray
> >>>> <ryan...@gmail.com
> >>>> <mailto:ryan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Can you link that? What exactly were
> >>>> they testing?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM
> >>>> Robert
> >>>> Andrews <i...@avantwireless.com
> >>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Somehow they passed a first
> >>>> review
> >>>> from US DOD... Can't be all
> >>>> smoke
> >>>> and mirrors in space...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 01/21/2020 12:18 PM, Ryan Ray
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> > I'm still very wary of this.
> >>>> There seems to be a lot of
> >>>> over-promising
> >>>> > under delivering. In typical
> >>>> Elon fashion, no details but the
> >>>> world runs
> >>>> > with it and puts out all these
> >>>> data models that make it seem
> >>>> like
> >>>> the
> >>>> > second coming of christ.
> >>>> Customer CPE is a pizza box ufo
> >>>> <$200 and they
> >>>> > are starting in 2020, but
> >>>> there's no pictures or details.
> >>>> How is that
> >>>> > even possible? We're buying
> >>>> 450b
> >>>> at a more expensive cost and
> >>>> there
> >>>> > ain't no phased antenna with
> >>>> motors in it.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Then all you read online is
> >>>> the
> >>>> cult following of spaceslax who
> >>>> takes a
> >>>> > twitter post as gospel and
> >>>> just
> >>>> keeps perpetuating the same
> >>>> tired
> >>>> > information.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:02
> >>>> AM
> >>>> Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com
> >>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com>
> >>>> > <mailto:part15...@gmail.com
> >>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > If the SpaceX Starlink
> >>>> system works at 50% of what it's
> >>>> hyped, it will
> >>>> > become the future of rural
> >>>> internet. Urban is still going
> >>>> to be
> >>>> > dominated (eventually) by
> >>>> fiber for the foreseeable future.
> >>>> Higher
> >>>> > speed
> >>>> > wireless will be very,
> >>>> very
> >>>> local.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > bp
> >>>> > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On 1/19/2020 6:29 PM, Matt
> >>>> Hoppes wrote:
> >>>> > > I don’t know why, but
> >>>> this evening got me thinking
> >>>> about
> >>>> > broadband delivery over
> >>>> the
> >>>> past 30 years and the future of
> >>>> broadband.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > First we had nothing,
> >>>> then along came dial-up and that
> >>>> was
> >>>> > amazing and many companies
> >>>> sprung up offering the service.
> >>>> Giants
> >>>> > like AOL and Prodigy.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > Then DSL and Cable came
> >>>> along as well as wireless and
> >>>> dial-up has
> >>>> > all but died.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > Now DSL is basically
> >>>> dead, cable and wireless have
> >>>> gone
> >>>> through
> >>>> > several iterations and we
> >>>> are seeing a push to fiber.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > What’s the possibility
> >>>> in
> >>>> the next 10 years cable and
> >>>> wireless
> >>>> > will be dead technologies
> >>>> with fiber at the fore front?
> >>>> Possibly.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > But then..... is fiber
> >>>> really future proof? We are
> >>>> talking about
> >>>> > investing hundreds of
> >>>> millions into fiber
> >>>> infrastructure, because
> >>>> > it’s “the future”. But is
> it?
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > So far every technology
> >>>> delivery mechanism to date has
> >>>> become
> >>>> > obsolete in as little as
> >>>> 6-10 years.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > --
> >>>> > AF mailing list
> >>>> > AF@af.afmug.com
> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com
> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>>
> >>>> >
> >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> AF mailing list
> >>>> AF@af.afmug.com
> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >>>>
> >>>> -- AF mailing list
> >>>> AF@af.afmug.com
> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Darin Steffl
> >>>>
> >>>> Minnesota WiFi
> >>>>
> >>>> www.mnwifi.com <http://www.mnwifi.com/>
> >>>>
> >>>> 507-634-WiFi
> >>>>
> >>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
> >>>> Like us on Facebook
> >>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- AF mailing list
> >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Carl Peterson
> >>>>
> >>>> *PORT NETWORKS*
> >>>>
> >>>> 401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553
> >>>>
> >>>> Baltimore, MD 21202
> >>>>
> >>>> (410) 637-3707
> >>>>
> >>>> -- AF mailing list
> >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >>>>
> >>>> -- AF mailing list
> >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> -- AF mailing list
> >>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > AF mailing list
> > AF@af.afmug.com
> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
