skip to main content
10.1145/3517745.3561457acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A browser-side view of starlink connectivity

Published:25 October 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

LEO satellite "mega-constellations" such as SpaceX's Starlink, Amazon's Kuiper, OneWeb are launching thousands of satellites annually, promising high-bandwidth low-latency connectivity. To quantify the achievable performance of such providers, we carry out a measurement study of the spatial and temporal characteristics as well as the geographic variability of the connectivity provided by Starlink, the current leader in this space. We do this by building and deploying a browser extension that provides data about web performance seen by 28 users from 10 cities across the world. We complement this with performance tests run from three measurement nodes hosted by volunteer enthusiasts in the UK, EU and USA. Our findings suggest that although Starlink offers some of the best web performance figures among the ISPs observed, there are important sources of variability in performance such as weather conditions. The bent-pipe connection to a satellite and back to earth also forms a significant component of the observed latency. We also observe frequent and significant packet losses of up to 50% of packets, which appear to be correlated with handovers between satellites. This has an effect on achievable throughput even when using modern congestion control protocols such as BBR or CUBIC.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

381.m4v

m4v

25.4 MB

References

  1. 2022. Two-line element set. https://celestrak.org/NORAD/documentation/tle-fmt.php.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2022. University of Surrey - Starlink Speedtest. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/university-of-surrey-star/mjgbdghdiohoffoinlicfkihcdkokpbg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Ian F. Akyildiz and Ahan Kak. 2019. The Internet of Space Things/CubeSats. IEEE Network 33, 5 (2019), 212--218. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Ian F. Akyildiz and Ahan Kak. 2019. The Internet of Space Things/CubeSats: A ubiquitous cyber-physical system for the connected world. Computer Networks 150 (2019), 134--149. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Akram Al-Hourani. 2021. Session Duration Between Handovers in Dense LEO Satellite Networks. IEEE Wireless Communications Letters 10, 12 (2021), 2810--2814.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Christian T Ardito, Joshua J Morales, Joe Khalife, Ali Abdallah, Zaher M Kassas, et al. 2019. Performance evaluation of navigation using LEO satellite signals with periodically transmitted satellite positions. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Technical Meeting of The Institute of Navigation. 306--318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Debopam Bhattacherjee, Simon Kassing, Melissa Licciardello, and Ankit Singla. 2020. In-Orbit Computing: An Outlandish Thought Experiment?. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (Virtual Event, USA) (HotNets '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 197--204. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Debopam Bhattacherjee and Ankit Singla. 2019. Network topology design at 27,000 km/hour. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments And Technologies. 341--354.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Tom Butash, Peter Garland, and Barry Evans. 2021. Non-geostationary satellite orbit communications satellite constellations history. International Journal of Satellite Communications and Networking 39, 1 (2021), 1--5. arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/sat.1375 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Luca Caviglione, Nedo Celandroni, Matteo Collina, Haitham Cruickshank, Gorry Fairhurst, Erina Ferro, Alberto Gotta, Michele Luglio, Cesare Roseti, Ahmed Abdel Salam, et al. 2015. A deep analysis on future web technologies and protocols over broadband GEO satellite networks. International Journal of Satellite Communications and Networking 33, 5 (2015), 451--472.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. CeleStark. 2022. Satellite Tracking. https://www.celestrak.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Stanley CF Chan, KM Chan, Ke Liu, and Jack YB Lee. 2013. On queue length and link buffer size estimation in 3G/4G mobile data networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 13, 6 (2013), 1298--1311.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Stephen Clark. 2022. SpaceX passes 2,500 satellites launched for Starlink Internet Network. https://spaceflightnow.com/2022/05/13/spacex-passes-2500-satellites-launched-for-companys-starlink-network/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Starlink Community. 2021. Dishy grpc client tools. https://github.com/starlink-community/starlink-cli.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Kristin Cooke. 2022. When Will Starlink Internet Be Available? https://www.satelliteinternet.com/resources/starlink-beta-sign-up/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Damir. 2020. Capacity of Starlink Network. https://lilibots.blogspot.com/2020/11/capacity-of-starlink-network.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Bradley Denby and Brandon Lucia. 2020. Orbital Edge Computing: Nanosatellite Constellations as a New Class of Computer System. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 939--954. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Jörg Deutschmann, Kai-Steffen Hielscher, and Reinhard German. 2019. Satellite internet performance measurements. In 2019 International Conference on Networked Systems (NetSys). IEEE, 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. John Farserotu and Ramjee Prasad. 2000. A survey of future broadband multi-media satellite systems, issues and trends. IEEE Communications Magazine 38, 6 (2000), 128--133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. FCC. 2021. FCC grants SpaceX's Satellite Broadband Modification Application. https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-grants-spacexs-satellite-broadband-modification-applicationGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. P. Fraise, B. Coulomb, B. Monteuuis, and J.-L. Soula. 2000. SkyBridge LEO satellites: optimized for broadband communications in the 21/sup st/ century. In 2000 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.00TH8484), Vol. 1. 241--251 vol.1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Zhixiang Gao, Aijun Liu, and Xiaohu Liang. 2020. The Performance Analysis of Downlink NOMA in LEO Satellite Communication System. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 93723--93732. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Seyed Ehsan Ghoreishi, Dmytro Karamshuk, Vasilis Friderikos, Nishanth Sastry, Mischa Dohler, and A Hamid Aghvami. 2019. A cost-driven approach to caching-as-a-service in cloud-based 5G mobile networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 19, 5 (2019), 997--1009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Mark Handley. 2018. Delay is not an option: Low latency routing in space. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks. 85--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Yannick Hauri, Debopam Bhattacherjee, Manuel Grossmann, and Ankit Singla. 2020. "Internet from Space" without Inter-Satellite Links. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (Virtual Event, USA) (HotNets '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 205--211. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Space Exploration Holdings. 2020. Application for modification of authorization for the SpaceX NGSO satellite system. https://fcc.report/IBFS/SAT-LOA-20200526-00055/2378669Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. IPinfo. 2022. IPinfo API. https://ipinfo.io/developers/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Ahan Kak and Ian F. Akyildiz. 2019. Large-Scale Constellation Design for the Internet of Space Things/CubeSats. In 2019 IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps). 1--6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Dmytro Karamshuk, Nishanth Sastry, Mustafa Al-Bassam, Andrew Secker, and Jigna Chandaria. 2016. Take-away TV: Recharging work commutes with predictive preloading of catch-up TV content. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 34, 8 (2016), 2091--2101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Dmytro Karamshuk, Nishanth Sastry, Andrew Secker, and Jigna Chandaria. 2015. ISP-friendly peer-assisted on-demand streaming of long duration content in BBC iPlayer. In 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM). IEEE, 289--297.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Simon Kassing, Debopam Bhattacherjee, André Baptista Águas, Jens Eirik Saethre, and Ankit Singla. 2020. Exploring the "Internet from Space" with Hypatia. In Proceedings of the ACM Internet Measurement Conference (Virtual Event, USA) (IMC '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 214--229. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Victor Le Pochat, Tom Van Goethem, Samaneh Tajalizadehkhoob, Maciej Korczyński, and Wouter Joosen. 2019. Tranco: A Research-Oriented Top Sites Ranking Hardened Against Manipulation. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS 2019). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Librespeed. 2021. Speedtest. https://github.com/librespeed/speedtest.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Kuiper Systems LLC. 2021. Application for authority to launch and operate a non-geostationary satellite orbit system in v-band and ku-band frequencies. https://fcc.report/IBFS/SAT-LOA-20211104-00145/13337525Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. François Michel, Martino Trevisan, Danilo Giordano, and Olivier Bonaventure. 2022. A First Look at Starlink Performance. In Proceedings of the 2022 Internet Measurement Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Remmy Musumpuka, Tom M. Walingo, and J. Macgregor Smith. 2016. Performance Analysis of Correlated Handover Service in LEO Mobile Satellite Systems. IEEE Communications Letters 20, 11 (2016), 2213--2216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Thang K Nguyen, Chuyen T Nguyen, Hoang D Le, and Anh T Pham. 2021. TCP performance over satellite-based hybrid FSO/RF vehicular networks: Modeling and analysis. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 108426--108440.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Jordan Novet. 2021. Google wins cloud deal from Elon Musk's SpaceX for Starlink internet connectivity. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/13/google-cloud-wins-spacex-deal-for-starlink-internet-connectivity.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. OpenWeather. 2022. Weather icons. https://openweathermap.org/weather-conditions.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Chol Hyun Park, Phillipe Austria, Yoohwan Kim, and Ju-Yeon Jo. 2022. MPTCP Performance Simulation in Multiple LEO Satellite Environment. In 2022 IEEE 12th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC). IEEE, 0895--0899.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Daniel Perdices, Martino Perna, Gianluca and Trevisan, Danilo Giordano, and Marco Mellia. 2022. When Satellite is All You Have When Satellite is All You Have: Watching the Internet from 550 ms. In Proceedings of the 2022 Internet Measurement Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Yubi Qian, Lu Ma, and Xuwen Liang. 2019. The performance of chirp signal used in LEO satellite Internet of Things. IEEE Communications letters 23, 8 (2019), 1319--1322.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Aravindh Raman, Dmytro Karamshuk, Nishanth Sastry, Andrew Secker, and Jigna Chandaria. 2018. Consume local: Towards carbon free content delivery. In 2018 IEEE 38th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS). IEEE, 994--1003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Aravindh Raman, Nishanth Sastry, Nader Mokari, Mostafa Salehi, Tooba Faisal, Andrew Secker, and Jigna Chandaria. 2018. Care to share? an empirical analysis of capacity enhancement by sharing at the edge. In Proceedings of the 2018 on Technologies for the Wireless Edge Workshop. 27--31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Aravindh Raman, Nishanth Sastry, Arjuna Sathiaseelan, Jigna Chandaria, and Andrew Secker. 2017. Wi-stitch: Content delivery in converged edge networks. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Mobile Edge Communications. 13--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. r/Starlink Subreddit. 2021. Neighbor has Starlink - but website says not available. Is this possible? https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/m8wof7/neighbor_has_starlink_but_website_says_not/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Raffaello Secchi, AC Mohideen, and Gorry Fairhurst. 2018. Performance analysis of next generation web access via satellite. International Journal of Satellite Communications and Networking 36, 1 (2018), 29--43.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. CAKAJ Shkelzen. 2009. Rain attenuation impact on performance of satellite ground stations for low earth orbiting (LEO) satellites in Europe. International Journal of Communications, Network and System Sciences 2009 (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. SpaceX. 2016. SPACEX NON-GEOSTATIONARY SATELLITE SYSTEM. https://fcc.report/IBFS/SAT-LOA-20161115-00118/1158350.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. SpaceX. 2019. SPACEX NON-GEOSTATIONARY SATELLITE SYSTEM. https://fcc.report/IBFS/SAT-MOD-20190830-00087/1877671.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Milda Tamošiunaite, Stasys Tamošiunas, Mindaugas Žilinskas, and Milda Tamošiuniene. 2011. Atmospheric Attenuation due to Humidity. In Electromagnetic Waves, Vitaliy Zhurbenko (Ed.). IntechOpen, Rijeka, Chapter 8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Meaghan Tobin. 2022. Just 2% of Starlink users live outside of the West, data suggests. https://restofworld.org/2022/starlink-elon-musk-global-access/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhipeng Wang and P.T. Mathiopoulos. 2001. Analysis and performance evaluation of dynamic channel reservation techniques for LEO mobile satellite systems. In IEEE VTS 53rd Vehicular Technology Conference, Spring 2001. Proceedings (Cat. No. 01CH37202), Vol. 4. 2985--2989 vol.4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Shiyi Xia, Quanjiang Jiang, Cheng Zou, and Guotong Li. 2019. Beam coverage comparison of LEO satellite systems based on user diversification. IEEE access 7 (2019), 181656--181667.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Chong-Hung Zee. 2013. Theory of geostationary satellites. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Wendong Zhou, Tao Hong, Xiaojin Ding, and Gengxin Zhang. 2021. LoRa Performance Analysis for LEO Satellite IoT Networks. In 2021 13th International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing (WCSP). IEEE, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A browser-side view of starlink connectivity

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      IMC '22: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Internet Measurement Conference
      October 2022
      796 pages
      ISBN:9781450392594
      DOI:10.1145/3517745

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 October 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate277of1,083submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      IMC '24
      ACM Internet Measurement Conference
      November 4 - 6, 2024
      Madrid , AA , Spain

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader