Broadband Wireless Internet Access (BWIA) News

The Verge Reviews Starlink Beta

Update 2021-05-25 - I now consider this article Starlink, Part 4 of a series. For the entire series, click on the Starlink tag.

I really had not intended to make Starlink a dominant theme of this blog. I actually have an entire blog in preparation that's dedicated to Satellite Broadband Internet Access. But sometimes, a story kind of writes itself in the moment, as this one did.

A number of people who've followed my two previous articles - Why Starlink Will Win Rural Broadband and More on Starlink pointed out an article published today on The Verge:

Starlink review: broadband dreams fall to Earth by Nilay Patel.

Unfortunately, instead of being a fair and impartial review, I think Patel misses two three four major points about Starlink, and missing those points tarnishes the review.

1. I think Patel gives lip service to is that Starlink is currently in beta development. There will be issues. That's expected in a beta deployment. The point of a beta deployment is to learn about those issues (both issues that were anticipated, and especially issues that weren't anticipated.) Despite that, Patel reviews his Starlink experience as if Starlink is a commercial, production system and concludes that it's unusable... as compared to his existing cellular and cable service. Which directly leads me to...

2. The entire point of Starlink is to provide Broadband Internet Service to customers in rural areas who do currently have any reasonable option for Broadband Internet Access. Defacto, if a customer does have a reasonable option for Broadband Internet Access, there would be little reason to consider Starlink. (That is, other than those very few of us who just like something cool, or really want a Broadband Internet Access option that doesn't depend [much] on terrestrial infrastructure.)

3. In my opinion, Patel didn't really conduct a proper "review" of Starlink. The Starlink app informed him in advance that there could be issues because of the trees surrounding him. Patel admits that Starlink recommends to get Dishy McFlatface as high up off the ground as possible to provide the best possible experience. Yet, Patel "reviews" Starlink with his Dishy McFlatface sitting in the back of a pickup truck and on a picnic bench. In a good faith review, Patel might have tried to put his Dishy McFlatface (just typing that name makes me smile) higher up on a pole.

4. This was really missing the point of Starlink:
Starlink’s latency also swings from fine — Zoom did not exhibit any delay when it worked — to pretty bad. My feeling is that the connection dropouts are going to be worse for gaming than latency, so I didn’t spend any time testing gaming latency, but Starlink itself measures ping times for Counter-Strike: Go and Fortnite in its app, and I rarely saw those numbers dip below 50ms, mostly hovering around 85-115ms. Those aren’t numbers you’d want to game with, unless you like losing. (Some Starlink testers have been able to play games and even use Stadia, but that seems both inconsistent and heavily dependent on satellite coverage in your area.)

Other than hardcore fanboys, I suspect that Starlink's support of a great gaming experience isn't exactly front of mind compared to... say... working remotely... or attending school remotely... or chatting with your doctor remotely... or keeping in touch with friends and family remotely.... 

Indeed, many other reviews such as Tom Evslin in rural Vermont and Brian Hines in rural Oregon, and many, many others on various Facebook groups report that their Starlink installations work reasonably well. No review that I've seen reports that Starlink works (overall) worse than their other options for Broadband Internet Access such as a Wireless Internet Service Provider (Evslin) and Digital Subscriber Line (Hines). Although WISP service and DSL service might not see the dropouts that Patel experienced, the overall experience of Starlink was superior to those options to the point that, warts and all, Starlink is now their preferred Broadband Internet Access option. That goes back to my Point 2 above - if you have a reasonable option for Broadband Internet Access, you're not in the customer base that Starlink is targeting. I suspect that Patel would be writing a completely different review if he didn't already have reasonable options for Broadband Internet Access.

Other than that major "missing the two three four major points about Starlink", the article is readable, informative, and at points actually amusing, such as:

And lastly, if you are a telecom executive or regulator in the United States, you have no choice but to see Starlink, its execution, and the unrestrained excitement and hype around it as a direct indictment of your rhetoric and efforts to properly connect this country to the internet over the past two decades. Dishy McDishface is a sign that reads YOU FUCKED UP AND EVERYONE HATES YOU. Read the sign. This is your fault.

Overall, I don't think Patel's article is a credible review. To me (totally my opinion), Patel's article reads a bit like a sensationalist "hit piece" because of the issues noted above. The article will undoubtedly drive hits to The Verge, and perhaps that was the main point.

Thanks for reading!
Steve Stroh
Bellingham, Washington, USA
2021-05-14
Portions Copyright © 2021 by Steven K. Stroh

 

 

Starry’s low-cost Internet bridges the digital divide in US cities

Good article in Wi-Fi NOW - Starry’s low-cost Internet bridges the digital divide in US cities by Claus Hetting.

It is well know that broadband services can be both scarce and expensive across rural USA. What is lesser known is that similar problems exist when it comes to delivering affordable broadband to public and affordable housing communities within US cities.

Enter Starry Connect: A program connecting tens of thousands of households with Wi-Fi-based wireless Internet at only $15 a month. Starry says that currently some 30,000 affordable and public housing units across the US are eligible to benefit from the program, which is equivalent to more than 100,000 potential users. Participating in the program is the Denver Housing Authority, the New York City Housing Authority, the Los Angeles Housing Authority, and others.

...

I've been a fan of Starry since its quiet debut after the techopathetic ruling from the US Supreme Court that doomed Starry's kind-of predecessor Aereo.

Starry is one of the better examples of seeing the potential of a new business In the failure of another business.

This story doesn't mention the genesis of Starry Internet, but with Aereo, Starry discovered that even in such an urban area as metropolitan Boston, reasonable speed / reliability / cost Broadband Internet Access was a significant issue.

Leveraging their considerable expertise in wireless technology developed with Aereo, in a savvy technological feat, Starry decided that they weren't going to entirely reinvent Broadband Wireless Internet Access (ala WiMAX). Instead they would make use of Wi-Fi technology which was nicely scaling in technology, reliability, speed, cost, etc. The problem with using Wi-Fi in Broadband Internet Access wasn't the technology, or the chips; the problem was the "Wi-Fi spectrum (2.4 GHz and 5 GHz)" was getting more crowded / noisy / saturated. 

But millimeter wave spectrum wasn't crowded / noisy / saturated and was a great "topographical" fit for urban areas. So Starry recreated an old wireless technology - the transverter, which converted the access spectrum (millimeter wave) to Wi-Fi's 5 GHz, and then used a second Wi-Fi to distribute Starry's Internet Access to the customer's devices (only a few feet away). If you can see certain buildings in town from a window in your unit (buildings where Starry has their "base stations" on rooftops) Starry can provide you Broadband Internet Access. 

I haven't followed Starry closely in the last few years, but apparently they're now offering Broadband Internet Access in

• Boston
• Denver
• Los Angeles
• New York City (I bet they're doing very well there)
• Washington DC

Godspeed Starry!

PS - Starry's approach - rooftop to window, is the right way to make use of "5G" millimeter wave spectrum, not trying to provide service via millimeter wave directly to handheld devices. 5G providers will eventually get this memo.

Thanks for reading!
Steve Stroh
Bellingham, Washington, USA
2021-05-14
Portions Copyright © 2021 by Steven K. Stroh

 

More on Starlink

Update 2021-05-25 - I now consider this article Starlink, Part 3 of a series. For the entire series, click on the Starlink tag.

Discussions ensued after my article Why Starlink Will Win Rural Broadband went live :-)

Starlink Business Models in Not-As-Developed Countries
There was considerable discussion about Starlink business models in not as developed countries. Despite the amazing growth and penetration of cellular, not everyone has cellular available.

I learned a lot about satellite geo / techno politics from several books about the Iridium system, especially Eccentric Orbits. A satellite system operator has to be flexible because, within its borders, each country can dictate the particulars of operating a satellite system. It's a balancing act on both sides - countries don't want the satellite operator to just turn off the sats as they pass over their country - they're too damn useful (China, Russia, and the US all use Iridium). On the other hand, the satellite operator has to price things so people don't game the system like buying Iridium minutes in a very low cost country and using them in a high cost country. Etc. A LEO satellite system has LOTS of moving parts.

A point I didn't make in my previous article is that the most expensive parts of Starlink - the satellites and the launch, is going to be paid for by the "developed world" customers. Once those satellites are in orbit, any additional revenue beyond those primary customers (that justified the satellite construction, launch, and operational expenses) is mostly "found revenue". That said, there are expenses of serving every customer, like bandwidth to the ground stations and construction and operation of the ground stations. I can also imagine there will be local repair facilities for all the Dishy McFlatfaces that will inevitably get damaged. Thus, it's reasonable (to me) to have different pricing and business models between developed countries and not as developed countries customers.

For example, in a not as developed country, put one Starlink terminal in a small, disconnected village, essentially as backhaul. Then use that bandwidth either in a Wi-Fi network, or a cellular network. Starlink would still get its $100/month revenue from that terminal, it just wouldn't be their original business model of one family or business per terminal.

One motivation for Starlink to do so is that individual countries have authority over spectrum usage within their borders. Thus they can make conditions on satellite service providers like Starlink to provide such "small village" service, as a condition of providing its normal service.

External Financial / Business / Capacity Models
Another point of considerable discussion was various financial / business / spectrum capacity modeling that concludes that Starlink isn't really viable because the financial / business / capacity model doesn't work out, thus Starlink won't be able to service enough customers to pay back its investment, etc. I understand that most who are creating these models know what they're doing, and such models generally work by accounting for as many variables as they can. But...

What strikes me, and I can't quite quantify it, is that a LEO satellite constellation is a very different analysis than a GEO satellite. You can do this kind of modeling with a GEO satellite because their coverage area per spot beam is static. You can know the customer density within each spot beam. You know the price of the satellite and the launch costs to get it to GEO. You can hope that the GEO satellite will last a decade or more.

But with a LEO satellite constellation, every satellite can potentially be earning revenue as it moves through its orbit. As each satellite flies through its orbit, it can sequentially provide service to residential, utility, mobile, and different countries. Each Starlink satellite will be earning revenue all over the planet, not just the in the US. And there will be more satellites being added for quite a while. Depending on its orbit, the customer mix of any particular satellite will vary minute to minute. Dynamic.

Thus, in mid-2021, I don't put much stock in external models of Starlink because Starlink as a system is highly dynamic and SpaceX / Starlink is opaque about so many details that factor into such models. The only thing Starlink is required to disclose is spectrum usage, the satellites themselves (to satisfy authorities about launch and orbit), and the ground terminals and user terminals. Nothing about internal pricing, capacities, enhancement of system capabilities, planned upgrades, etc. 

I say "dynamic" because (no surprise) Starlink seems to embody its parent company SpaceX's ethos of "iterate fast, see what breaks, fix it, make it better, repeat". Every batch of Starlink satellites can be better and more capable. As they evolve Starlink, they're changing assumptions that those external models are built on. Just one example that I can pick on is models that have been quoted at me blithely state "Up to X customers can be serviced by the amount of spectrum available to one Starlink satellite, and X customers aren't enough to pay back the price of the satellite." Um... no. No one external to Starlink can say with certainty how many customers can be served by a Starlink satellite. I'll explain some other Starlink scenarios that would generate additional customers / revenue.

For example, to increase system capacity without additional spectrum, Starlink can basically do what cellular companies do to increase system capacity without additional spectrum - shrink the coverage area of a base station and add more base stations for more aggressive frequency reuse. In Starlink's case, they can tighten the beam footprint and add more satellites. That's more expensive, but making more satellites and doing more launches doesn't seem to be a limiting factor for Starlink.

Starlink Isn't Significant Competition For...
There are a lot of businesses that aren't going to see Starlink coming for them until it's too late. Of course the canonical example of not seeing it coming was that AT&T didn't consider the Internet as competition... until it was.

We're going to see a lot of stories like this one from Light Reading: Starlink's threat to wired broadband 'minimal' – analyst. Yep! And that is the plan. Actually the Light Reading story is a pretty good one, and it sounds like the subject of the story, Craig Moffat's analysis of Starlink is better than most. Moffat discloses many of the "unknowns" about Starlink, but does so expertly, versus my amateurish analysis. (Yes, I'm happy to admit that.)

When I mentioned in a discussion that it would be easy for Starlink to add Internet of Things (IOT) services to its capabilities, one commenter mentioned that there are satellite startups addressing the IOT market with small inexpensive satellites and corresponding low prices (like $10/month). The commenter concluded by saying that those IOT satellite operators don't think that Starlink is competition for them. My reply:

I'll further guess that a fair number of Starlink terminals won't require significant bandwidth all the time. I'm guessing Starlink will quickly get into the Internet of Things monitoring... pipelines, electrical grids, etc. One of the big differences between Starlink and, say, VSAT [Very Small Aperture Terminal] systems is that there's enough bandwidth in Starlink to allow video for security. I'll guess electric utilities would like to have a video feed of all their key sites that's not dependent on cellular or microwave.

In a later discussion I amplified on this point by extrapolating that, in direct competition for those IOT satellite systems, Starlink may well develop a small, inexpensive ground station that doesn't use a phased array antenna for situations that don't need continuous connectivity. It you have modest data requirements such as uploading a day's worth of data from a remote reservoir, it's quite feasible to point a static antenna skyward and just wait for a flyover by a Starlink satellite. Starlink's bandwidth is sufficient that only a few seconds of connectivity would be needed for such an application.

One of the reasons I'm skeptical of business models predicting that Starlink isn't viable is the possibility of additional revenue from hosted payloads on Starlink satellites. Part of the business plan for Iridium Next was hosted payloads. There's nothing to prevent Starlink from doing so. Starlink can use such potential revenue in its business modeling, but no one external could know about such a possibility until Starlink is required to disclose particulars about the payload or communications requirements.

Starlink as Bypass for the Internet / Governments
One commenter mused that Starlink might be a good way to bypass government censorship or monitoring (including by the US). I don't think that's practical (yet). At the moment, Starlink is operating as a "bent pipe" which means there has to be a ground station to provide Internet bandwidth to/from the satellites. Thus there's an effective censorship point within the country. Not to mention that Starlink uses spectrum which (theoretically) has to be licensed for use in each country. Starlink could, technically, ignore that dictum, but it would be... inadvisable to do so. It would be easy to jam Starlink, and Starlink wouldn't want to burn its bridges in any country.

Then there's the fact that Starlink is built (satellites, ground stations, user terminals) in the US by a US company. The Starlink system is managed by a US-based company, from the US. So, do the math about what the US government could do if (when) the US government sees the need. I know nothing about Starlink's internal protocols, but I've seen nothing mentioned about privacy considerations such as built-in encryption. (Perhaps relying, mostly on end-to-end encryption such as https.) I think I read that Starlink, or Elon Musk, said that internally Starlink doesn't use TCP/IP, only that only the users and the Internet connections see TCP/IP... so that's interesting.

It will be different in a few years when Starlink starts to use inter-satellite links. Then, it will be a much more resilient system, much less dependent on ground infrastructure. Once the inter-satellite links are working, that will theoretically allow communications between any two Starlink user terminals anywhere on earth to transit only the Starlink system. Again, it doesn't benefit Starlink to flout various government regulations - better to choose not to provide service within a particular country if a country's regulations are too onerous.

Iridium uses inter-satellite routing now, and that's one of its strengths. If you don't think that inter-satellite links are practical, remember that Iridium had inter-satellite links figured out on its original satellites in the 1990s. We've had some technical evolution since then.

Bottom line - I, personally, wouldn't count on my communications over Starlink being secure enough to conduct illegal activities (including illegal speech in certain countries). At least, don't consider Starlink to be any more secure than using conventional Internet or cellular connectivity.

Starlink Speeds Are Decreasing; Starlink Still Has Drop-outs
A commenter made the point (in support of their thesis that Starlink may not be viable) that reported speeds of Starlink users are declining. Yes, speeds have gone down as more users have come on the system. Starlink is still optimizing the satellite orbits, tuning all the software, and continually adding ground stations. Even if Starlink halved the average reported speed (that I've seen from first hand accounts) from 100 Mbps to 50 Mbps, it would still be considered a roaring success and very welcome because the average speeds, quality, and reliability of the other options for Broadband Internet Access in rural areas are so poor. 

Starlink Capacity Concerns
As I confessed earlier, all of my "analysis" about Starlink is amateurish. I have no hard information about Starlink other than what little has been published in the open, no inside sources (Oh, I wish...), etc. So this is really going to be a leap further out.

I think that the ultimate solution for Starlink capacity concerns, at least for Ground Terminal to Satellite, and inter-satellite, will be lasers. For ground-to-satellite, there have been experiments. There's also been amazing progress in adaptive optics to focus long laser paths. Most of that is from military experimentation. Eventually someone will commercialize it. Given that very few thought that it was feasible to return a rocket first stage to the ground by landing it upright, nor to actually launch and operate a worldwide network of Internet access satellites... I wouldn't count SpaceX out for developing practical ground-to-LEO-satellite laser links.

For inter-satellite links, lasers are more practical as there's little attenuation (but not none - there are still air molecules at LEO) to worry about. Mostly it's a matter of aim, or at least a balance of a tightly focused beam (requires precision aiming) or beam spreading (higher attenuation, but aiming requirements are reduced). Mostly, it's an exercise of an n-dimensional matrix choosing which satellite to communicate with every millisecond and constantly updating aim and other parameters. I think that the requisite compute power suitable for use on satellites is now possible, and perhaps even practical.

Starlink as a Godsend to Parents who are Boaters
It's been practical for some time to provide Internet connectivity, and eventually Broadband Internet Connectivity to boats and ships out of line of sight of land. Inmarsat was the first to provide that capability (I used Inmarsat systems in the early 1980s), and now Iridium offers reasonable speeds for connectivity (but not exactly "Broadband" at 300+ kBPS). But it's never been cheap. But now Starlink intends to make mobile user terminals, as long as the vehicle can accommodate the same form factor as Dishy McFlatface.

That gave me the idea for a funny extrapolation about Starlink - every pleasure craft on, for example, the Great Lakes (that can go, say, 100 miles from shore) owned by a family with teenagers is going to get a lot more popular because now those boats can be equipped with a Starlink terminal. When Mom, Dad, or the grandparents propose a long boat trip away from land (or into remote areas like sparsely populated islands) the teenagers won't scream in agony because via Starlink they'll be able to stay in touch with their friends, even doing social videos. The parents or grandparents will be a lot happier with a fixed bill from Starlink rather than the Oh My God! bill from Inmarsat or Iridium after a week with teenagers onboard.

I can imagine a similar scenario for commercial vessel personnel on the US coasts and inland waterways, including the Great Lakes. All of the sudden, they can get Netflix! As a former full-time resident on a commercial vessel, I can testify that having access to Netflix onboard would be a very, very welcome addition to shipboard life.

Thanks for reading!
Steve Stroh
Bellingham, Washington, USA
2021-05-13
Copyright © 2021 by Steven K. Stroh

Interview on Plutopia News Network Podcast

Plutopia News Network - STEVE STROH: BROADBAND ACCESS

(April 29, 2021) With Scoop and Jon, technology writer and broadband consultant Steve Stroh discusses broadband access, rural wireless Internet providers, satellite-based Internet, fiber networks, and much more.

“If you can get fiber, do it. Because it is the best, highest quality – not just fastest, but it’s the best option for broadband Internet access. Because, basically, it’s pure data. You’ve got a pair of glass fibers dedicated to you, typically straight between your house or business and the central office. Or wherever it’s going to be hubbed out of. It’s immune to electrical interference, it’s generally immune to everything – water doesn’t bother it, it’s not shared with other people, and about the only thing that can take out fiber is squirrels or backhoes.”

Steve writes about about Broadband Wireless Internet Access systems and technology. In 1997 he started a column about wireless for Internet Service Providers called Wireless Data Developments in Boardwatch Magazine in April, 1997. He’s currently thinking and writing about Independent Broadband Networks, small broadband networks usually in rural areas.

Direct link to MP3 audio file of the interview:
https://media.blubrry.com/plutopia_news_network/s/plutopia.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Steve-Stroh.mp3

...

My wonderful wife Tina frequently accuses me of under-promoting myself, and I'm guilty as charged. I should have posted this a couple of weeks ago as soon as it was publicly available.

This interview was a fun conversation with Jon Lebkowsky, a techie of long-standing (exceeding my long standing techie-ness) and his podcasting partner-in-crime Scoop Sweeney on their eclectic podcast Plutopia News Network.

This interview came out of writing my story Why Starlink Will Win Rural Broadband. Jon and I are participants in "a certain online community (which I cannot name)" and as part of the discussions in that community about Starlink, Jon invited me to do an interview. Jon and Scoop were easy to talk to and asked good questions. They teased out the quote which quite dramatically starts the podcast. The hour plus of our conversation flew by quickly.

Thanks for reading!
Steve Stroh
Bellingham, Washington, USA
2021-05-13
Portions Copyright © 2021 by Steven K. Stroh

 

One Person's Quest for Rural Broadband

On Substack's The Mad Net Memo, there's an interesting two-part story about one person's quest for Broadband Internet Access in a rural town in Massachusetts.

Thin Pipe, Part I - My Strange, Slow, Twenty-Year Quest for Broadband

The author details his progression through dialup, hybrid GEO satellite (satellite downlink, dialup uplink), trying for DSL and cable and failing (his house is too rural) and GEO satellite.

Favorite quote:
I remember once having the signal go out on a clear blue day, and calling tech support to see what was going on. I suspected some sort of maintenance thing that they also tended to schedule at inconvenient times. I told the support staff I couldn’t find anything wrong on my side since it was clear weather.
They told me “Oh, it’s raining in Galveston Texas pretty hard.”
“Galveston Texas?” I asked.
“Yes this is where our uplink dishes are, and its causing a brief outage of service.”

The author's town eventually deployed a BWIA system that was apparently a distribution system that put a high-capacity system on a close mountain, which fed 902-928 MHz distribution nodes in the (heavily treed) community. The distribution nodes became oversubscribed (easy to do with a 902-928 MHz system) and he was able to connect directly to the mountaintop node by a friendly neighbor installing that radio 80 feet up on a tree.

Eventually that system aged out from a combination of factors, and he started using Broadband Internet via cellular, which was even more maddening than all the other broadband options he'd tried previously.

Then... there was the possibility of a municipal fiber system. But first, there were "some politics".

Thin Pipe, Part 2 - What would you do for faster internet? The author risks being exiled from town to get it.

Part 1 was a fairly straightforward (but amusing) recital of bad Broadband Internet options. Part 2 gets really interesting, because it involves politics... hyper-local politics and the role those politics played in getting a solution. Things seemed to go well... until they didn't.

In the end, the author ends up with reasonable Broadband Internet Access, but how he ultimately ended up getting is an interesting tale.

In a nutshell, Thin Pipe, Part 2 explains why a lot of municipal Internet Access systems don't get built, and if they do, why some don't result in the nirvana of widely available, reliable, fast Broadband Internet Access at reasonable rates. Remember that the author did, at one time, actually have decent (for the time) Internet access provided by a municipal system. But with no commercial motivations to upgrade and expand it, that system eventually saturated and aged out and the original (capable) personnel were long gone. After reading Part 2, you'll might (like I did) shake your head at the close call of having this particular municipality actually attempting tobuild a municipal fiber network.

This bolsters my view of (previous article) Why Starlink Will Win Rural Broadband. Fast forward a few months to 2022. Someone like the author wants to move to a rural area and needs Broadband Internet Access but it's not available at their new home. (Realistically, in 2022, "needs Broadband Internet Access" describes nearly anyone who wants to participate in society, work, education, or increasingly, healthcare.)

To get Broadband Internet Access, do you "fight the good fight" to drag a municipal fiber system into your rural area, fighting bitterly against those that do not (ever) want to pay for it? You might think the naysayers are shortsighted - you'd be right. But then you've probably never lived in a rural area where this issue is very, very real (as the author explains so well).

Or do you just pragmatically go to Starlink.com and sign up? A few weeks later, your own Dishy McFlatface shows up that you install yourself. A few minutes after setting it up and plugging it in, and a few taps on the Starlink app later and Presto! you're online with Broadband Internet Access with no politics, no months or years-long wait. Not to mention no worries that your local municipality will remain competent to maintain the system.

It's a valid discussion about how much is lost when individuals can get reasonable Internet via Starlink without having to band together to force the issue of developing community-wide Broadband Internet Access (wireless, or fiber), with nearly everyone in the community benefitting once it's in place. I don't know the answer, other than those of us in rural areas that have been waiting for Broadband to catch up with us... can get it (in 2022), pretty much on demand.

Thanks for reading!
Steve Stroh
Bellingham, Washington, USA
2021-05-12
Copyright © 2021 by Steven K. Stroh