WAN and LAN question over HughesNet satellite link

N4AB

This is for the Flex techs and the WAN/LAN techs in the group. I don't live totally off the grid (I have electric and land-line phone service) but I am out in the woods far enough that we don't have cable service, and there is a mountain blocking cell phone service to our house. For the internet we use Hughes Net Satellite ,Generation 4 ,Ultra service. It is specked out at 15 Mbps download and 2 Mbps upload speed. However an average of 20 speed tests done in the last 24 hours shows the download speed is about 10.39 Mbps and upload speed is 9.05 Mbps. With a max of 13.636 Mbps and a min of 58 Mbps. The question is will I be able to use my 6700 remotely when Flex releases the WAN up grade. I have been trying to find better service but it seems that Hughes has got the best system, any ideas would be appreciated. Al, N4AB

Stu Phillips - K6TU

Al,

What is the latency?  That may be the bigger issue than the uplink speed.  It's unknowable at this point what FlexRadio may do regarding WAN operation in 2.0.

Stu K6TU

N4AB

Thanks for the reply Stu. How do I measure the latency on the link? The service really is not very good but a lot better than dialup. Al, N4AB

Stu Phillips - K6TU

If you run the Global Speedtest, it will report a latency number.

http://www.speedtest.net/index.php

Stu K6TU

Warren Gaspar

Al,

You are dealing with a law of physics.  It takes a packet 1/4 sec to reach the satellite and 1/4 sec to come back.  Given that Ethernet time-to-live is in the millisecond range the resultant latency is a killer which is why VOIP doesn't work over satellite.  Hughes Net is using proxy servers to and local caches to fool the browser into thinking all is well but streaming of any sort must live the latency which appears as slow down or disconnects.  At least this is my understanding of how it works but I think your stuck on this one.

Warren NU7R

ctate243

Latency is the big problem with sat internet..  500-800ms is not uncommon unless they have added new tech..

ctate243

ping yahoo.com from the command line.. 

Greg N8GD

A quick search for HughesNet Gen4 latency reveals that it hovers around 700 ms on average.  I know that satellite Internet service is generally considered unacceptable for online gaming because of that.  Latencies approaching 1 second will probably wreak havoc with turnaround for even voice transmissions.  My EchoLink node has a 1.5 second delay and confuses users.

I would also want to know the minimum UPLOAD speed for your link, and how often does it get that low.  Stu mentions in his post on the use of SoftEther VPN that upload speeds below 3 Mbps are problematic.

Stu is also correct in that we have no idea what kind of tricks Flex will be using to enhance WAN connectivity in Version 2.0 of SSDR.  With what we have today, using VPN workarounds, it seems that anything lower that 3 Mbps either direction won't be good.

Greg - N8GD

Jim Gilliam

One way that might give you an insight is to use a program like Teamviewer and see if you can control the remote computer and visusalize the graphics and hear the audio clearly. If that works, I would bet it will work with SmartSDR 2.0 when it comes out.

KY6LA_Howard

I have regularly operated with 300-500ms latency when remoting into my La Jolla Station from international locations Far too slow for contesting or CW But works great for rag chewing and for some DXing I just make sure the other party understands I am remote with very slow turn around time

Steve K9ZW

My experience with Hughes Satellite Internet in its various brandings is that it is quite unsuited for remote work with huge & hugely variable latency, massive buffering doing "bursts" of connectivity vs steady connection, goes down in serious weather and tends to be very pricey.

Sometimes it is all you can get, and then you have to put up with it.

They did at least at one point have improved options which basically seem to create a number of the same low grade connections and do a managed combining process.  We never tried it due to costs and user reports that it was subject to the same limitations.

73

Steve

K9ZW

Ross - K9COX

Exede?

Duane_AC5AA

Yes - my sister's family lives in the MO Ozarks, and their only options are satellite.  They had Hughes and it was terrible, both service and support.  They moved to Exede and they find it is much better on both scores, as well as being slightly better in price.  Of course, it will still have the satellite latency problem.  I won't have a chance to try it with my 6500 for another 6-9 months.

Walt - KZ1F

Wait...YOU ragchew??? Now I've heard it all.

N4AB

OK I guess i'm going to be in "Deep Doo Doo" trying to operate remotely once it becomes available. Based on Stu's recommendations I ran some (32) more speed tests. The results were not very good. Max Download 13.94 Mb/s Average Download 10.49 Mb/ s Min Download 2.38 Mb/s Max Upload 1.07 Mb/s Average Upload 0.70 Mb/s Min Upload 0.35 Mb/s Max Latency 1305 .00 ms Average Latency 760.31 ms Min Latency 669.00 ms So as Warren NU7R put it I'm "Stuck" As for some of the other suggestions, Dudley (Flex Tech) has operated my 6700 using "Teamviewer" for testing a problem but I did not ask him about the Graphics or audio at that time. And as far as changing to EXEDE their download/upload speed is rated at 10/1 the last time I checked. Howard's 300-500 ms latency statement is somewhat encouraging, so I will try "Remote" when its released but I will not hold my breath till then. Thanks very much to everyone who responded to this issue. It is really great to be able to ask a question and and get answers and suggestions so quickly. 73 for now, Al N4AB

Ross - K9COX

Exede "claims" 12/3 for your Zip code

Ken - WA8JXM

FWIW, I just checked Exede and the ping time was 754ms, which is about typical for them.