41–50 of 67 posts
How does that compete with starlink? I suppose the bandwidth of a subsea cable is much higher, but latency is worse?
As designed oceanic latencies will be lower than direct fibre, only microwave would be faster.
As currently deployed, starlink latency isn’t much to write home about as you only get a few hindered km to the ground station and then you’re on fibre.
By how much will it improve latency between EU and Asia? or US and Asia?
Unfortunately probably none, unless you live pretty far north. We're pretty close to the speed of light limit* when it comes to latency between the US and Asia, which makes sense as a straight line is over the Pacific anyway. (e.g., I get ~1.1x the theoretical min latency pinging Tokyo from my Fiber connection in the SF Bay Area) Where it seems like we're pretty far from the theoretical min is connections within the…
By how much will it improve latency between EU and Asia? or US and Asia?
Unfortunately probably none, unless you live pretty far north. We're pretty close to the speed of light limit* when it comes to latency between the US and Asia, which makes sense as a straight line is over the Pacific anyway. (e.g., I get ~1.1x the theoretical min latency pinging Tokyo from my Fiber connection in the SF Bay Area) Where it seems like we're pretty far from the theoretical min is connections within the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From what I understand Starlink satellites do not communicate between each other yet, maybe that's outdated info. I know there will be inter-sat comm eventually. But they are 500km in altitude and the atmosphere is 100km so they only have about 400km of vacuum from obit to Earth stations. So it's a 1,000km round trip and then through ground stations, fibre cabling.
> From what I understand Starlink satellites do not communicate between each other yet, maybe that's outdated info. It’s always been wrong. By design the Starlink satellites communicated with each other. Too cost prohibitive and infeasible in other ways to have a ground station covering every satellite.
2014: https://spectrum.ieee.org/arctic-fibre-project-to-link-japan...
For anyone curious, there's an image of the route in this article: https://www.aroged.com/2021/12/24/far-north-digital-and-cini...
For anyone curious, there's an image of the route in this article: https://www.aroged.com/2021/12/24/far-north-digital-and-cini...
That article has the same ad like a dozen times in a row, and also what is clearly JavaScript leaking out around them. Cool visual but what a sloppy site.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From what I understand Starlink satellites do not communicate between each other yet, maybe that's outdated info. I know there will be inter-sat comm eventually. But they are 500km in altitude and the atmosphere is 100km so they only have about 400km of vacuum from obit to Earth stations. So it's a 1,000km round trip and then through ground stations, fibre cabling.
> From what I understand Starlink satellites do not communicate between each other yet, maybe that's outdated info. It’s always been wrong. By design the Starlink satellites communicated with each other. Too cost prohibitive and infeasible in other ways to have a ground station covering every satellite.
I'm curious how far each satellite is from the other, do they need line-of-sight. And how much it adds to latency since signals received and sent have to go through networking equipment within each satellite.
Is this Cable specifically for connection to go from EUR to JAP without going through China? I am wondering if this is made possible only because of the melting ice cap, where the "possibility" of travelling through the arctic is now a low cost issue. I am also assuming once the cable are laid, it doesn't make much of a difference whether the surface is Artic or Pacific? I am assuming the sea floor is roughly all the…
...Is there really any meaningful amount of EU>JP traffic going through China? No matter what I try to increase by bandwidth between the two (from residential as well as cloud) it always gets routed through US. Usually Phoenix. Never been able to get north of ~15Mbps IIRC. I’m sure there are providers that can provide better through private backbone and premium peering agreements, but I haven’t figured that out yet. If anyone has any tips or strategies on how to approach it would be very grateful. Even 50Mbps on a budget would be a game-changer.
My guess would be more about resilience. If a couple of key points get knocked out or saturated I imagine things could break pretty fast.