Slashdot Log In
Virgin American In-Flight Internet Review, From In-Flight
Posted by
timothy
on Thu May 07, 2009 02:29 PM
from the latency-desires dept.
from the latency-desires dept.
wintersynth writes "I've posted a review of Virgin America's in-flight internet provided by Gogo. Here's the scoop: Avg. .90 megabits/sec DL, .283 megabits/sec UL, ping: 130.6 msecs, $12.95 for the duration of the flight. Verdict: AWESOME. In fact, I'm posting this from 36,000 feet right now. Skype did not work for voice, even though I'm pretty sure those stats are over the minimums. Any ideas from the slashdotters on what might be going on?"
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Skype (Score:5, Informative)
Another possibility is that Gogo is demoting UDP traffic in some sort of QoS scheme to ensure that things like e-mail and regular HTTP traffic aren't slow or interrupted because 4 people are using Skype.
Re:Skype (Score:5, Informative)
Skype uses UDP rather than TCP (like normal web traffic). If I remember correctly, UDP packets are many small packets which may perform badly over connections of very high latency.
UDP shouldn't have anything to do with latency, nor is it limited to "many small packets". UDP is just a transport protocol that lacks the error checking/data integrity and ordering mechanism of TCP. If such features are important to you then you need to use TCP or build them into your application that uses UDP.
The advantage of UDP comes in time critical applications where it's probably better to lose a few packets (i.e: have a second or two of dead air during a phone call) than delay the transmission (conversation stops while it waits for the lost packets to be retransmitted). Latency really doesn't have anything to do with it, although latency is bad for VoIP for other reasons.
Parent
Re:Skype (Score:5, Funny)
In other words, UDP says:
"here take it!".
TCP says:
Client: "Hi, Nice to meet you, I'm TCP-Client".
Server: "Hi, TPC-Client I'm TCP-Server." (shakes hands)
TCP-Client: "I've got data for you. Here you go."
TCP-Server: "I got most of the data and it appears uncorrupt, but I'm missing page 2 and 374. Cand you send them again?"
TCP-Client: "Here you go. That's all, Goodbye"
TCP-Server: "Damn, he left before I could say goodbye"
Or something like that, it's been a while since my network programming class. But it was a lot of fun implementing these protocols. =P
Parent
Re:Skype (Score:5, Funny)
That's close, but I'm not sure your technical jargon is exactly how I learned it. :)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
How about a car rental analogy? You book a car rental ahead of time.
With UDP, the rental place leaves the keys in the ignition.
With TCP, you go to collect your rental. Sign on the door reads "Yes, we are OPEN! Please come in." You enter and approach the counter.
Client: "I'd like to rent a car. I have a booking."
Agent: "Thank you for choosing us, sir! Here is your contract. Please sign here, here, here, here, and here."
Client: [signs] "There you are."
Agent: "Here are your keys."
Client: "Than
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/protocol/udp.htm [networksorcery.com]
http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/protocol/tcp.htm [networksorcery.com]
Re:Skype (Score:5, Informative)
I fired up Skype and dialed out. Massive failure. For some reason the sound is horrendously choppy and thin sounding. It was completely unusable.
You're experiencing high "jitter." Jitter is the change in delay from packet to packet. If odd numbered packets take 100 ms and even numbered packets take 150 ms then you have 50ms of jitter.
Certain protocols like VoIP and NTP require connections with low jitter in order to perform acceptably.
Parent
Jitter Buffer (Score:4, Informative)
Asterisk 1.4+ has a jitter buffer for at least IAX and SIP which helps to work around jitter in most cases. Given that they know what they're doing, I assume Skype does too.
Jitter is (relatively) okay, it's packet loss that VoIP is particularly sensitive to. Packet loss at levels that will only mildly inconvenience most other traffic will screw up VoIP quite badly... there's no mention of packet loss in the article that I see, but I suspect that's what's causing the poor quality.
Parent
Skype? (Score:3, Insightful)
Skype is Not Blocked (Score:3, Informative)
Probably blocked everything VoIP related to force airphones on you.
From the article:
I'm trying to get some critical production tasks done, and the rep I work with emailed me to call her. Thinking I was so tricky and cool, I fired up Skype and dialed out. Massive failure. For some reason the sound is horrendously choppy and thin sounding. It was completely unusable. I didn't get a chance to speak and see how I sounded on the other end. I tried dialing the Skype test call, but I only caught every other word.
Sounds like he could connect, it was just choppy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Skype? (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably blocked everything VoIP related to force airphones on you.
Except that most airplanes removed airphones long ago, since they never really worked economically. Certainly Virgin America's brand-new planes won't have them.
They probably blocked everything VoIP related so that the people next to you don't throttle you for shouting in to your fucking Bluetooth headset while they're trying to read, sleep, or otherwise try to ignore you.
Parent
Re:Skype? (Score:5, Insightful)
This, so much this.
Flight time is quiet time, for god's sake leave the phone alone or I might just kill you. Trust me, I already hate you enough for having the audacity to get up to use the bathroom, for smelling of *anything* and for claiming rights to the middle armrest between our seats. If you start yakking away I can't be responsible for my actions. Now have fun with your internets but PLEASE shut the hell up.
Parent
May I be the first to say (Score:5, Insightful)
I tried dialing the Skype test call, but I only caught every other word. So much for my dreams of in-flight video conferencing while yelling over the din of jet engines.
Oh god, I hope you, nor anyone else, ever gets this to work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Amen. Can you imagine an 8-hour flight with everyone yapping around you? Hideous.
"yeah.. no that's what I said!.. oh he always acts like that HAHAHA... hey are you going to that thing on saturday?....... yeah but Jim will be there!..... oh this flight is taking for-EVER... geez promise you'll come visit me!.... oh hang on, he's calling, I'll call you right back!.. no, it's ok, we don't land for another four hours.. mmkay, bye--kisses!.... hey honey!"
Re:May I be the first to say (Score:5, Funny)
Noise canceling headphones, with pressure relieving ear plugs.
I've flown a few times with slight upper respiratory infection (because I had to, not that I wanted to). With that usually comes Eustachian tube dysfunction. That can range from annoying to painful. By painful, I mean feeling and hearing your eardrum ripping open, and then not being able to hear anything but a rattle for the next few days.
So when I fly, I buy the pressure relieving ear plugs. They usually sell them in pharmacy stores and the gift shops at the airport. Over them, I wear decent noise canceling headphones. I can hear the movie, music, or my laptop, but I can be completely unaware of the person beside me.
I've flown with crying babies and shrieking teenage girls near me. The only time I remove the headphones is when I want to ask the stewardess for another drink. :)
Go for it kids, get your Skype working. Don't disturb my drinks and we're all fine.
But please, I beg all of you. If your ass is as wide as two airline seats, PLEASE book two seats. No matter how large you are, you're not welcome to share my seat for an 8 hour flight. Don't complain that the seats are too small, when your BMI is over 40. Stop making excuses, and stop eating so much. Your weight is directly effected by your intake. That's all there is to it.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Yes, I'm on the plane now".
"Well no shit Sherlock, I just dropped you at the airport. You'd hardly be likely to be on the elephant now, would you ?".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They talk louder because they judge how well they are being heard by how well they hear themselves. Over the constant drone of jet engines, people have to talk louder to hear themselves. Thus, they assume they need to be that loud so the microphone just an inch away from their face can hear them.
plus it is pressurized to reduce the need to scream further.
"Pressurized" is a relative term. Standard cabin air pressure is around 8000 f
Re:May I be the first to say (Score:4, Funny)
The plastic knives and forks supposedly don't work well for hijacking, but they should be okay to use on an in-flight yapper. For bonus points, use the spoon.
Parent
Re:May I be the first to say (Score:5, Funny)
Did you mean, "Did you mean, "I hope neither you nor anyone else"?"?
The second comma separates "nor anyone else" from "you", but "anyone else" is an ultimate qualifier, which should be placed at the end of any lists.
You're using "gets" for "you" when you should be using "get". This seems correct since you're using "neither" and ", nor anyone else" to (incorrectly) form a list.
Since there is no list involved, the ultimate qualifier should be used parenthetically after the verb, or without the comma. If we're using it parenthetically, we drop the "neither" and commute that negative over to "ever", and change "gets" to "get" as well.
"Oh god, I hope neither you nor anyone else ever gets this to work."
"Oh god, I hope you never get this to work (nor anyone else)."
If you add in a third comma it's still wrong.
"Oh god, I hope neither you, nor anyone else, ever gets this to work." Separating out "nor anyone else" with commas before the verb "gets" ties "gets" to "you", which is incorrect. Parenthesis should be used here if you want to keep "nor anyone else" before the verb in order to prevent any conjugation conflict.
If you're going to be a Grammar Nazi, do it correctly.
If you're going to bitch about my use and nesting of quotation marks and punctuation at the beginning of my post, eat a dick. What is inside a quotation must be copied exactly. If it includes quotation marks, so be it. Nobody said it had to be easy (or unambiguous) to parse, and any attempt to use single quotes, block quotes, etc. can be foiled if you need to quote something containing them, so they do not provide complete disambiguation.
Parent
Internet on a plane (Score:4, Funny)
Yes,
You need to watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jETv3NURwLc [youtube.com]
Skype... blocked or just sounded bad? (Score:2, Insightful)
They might have a way to block Skype, or it could just be a large amount of jitter from you to the Skype gateway you were trying to reach.
Louis CK would be pleased. (Score:5, Funny)
Everything is awesome and no one is happy!
Linky (Score:3, Funny)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jETv3NURwLc [youtube.com]
VOIP on planes = bad (Score:4, Insightful)
Logically, they likely blocked it in order to preserve the sanity of other passengers.
Srsly? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
It is if you're stuck in a crowded, narrow tube for 5 hours, little to keep your mind off the situation.
Re:Srsly? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Srsly? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Srsly? (Score:4, Insightful)
Am I the only one who assumed they are targeting business travelers? 13 dollars is nothing to them, literally - their company pays for it.
Internet on the plane is an awesome concept to the average person, but I think most people will change their mind when it comes down to typing in their credit card number.
Parent
Traceroute? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Traceroute? (Score:5, Funny)
Tracing route to www.l.google.com [74.125.45.103]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 3 ms 1 ms 1 ms linksys.local [192.168.1.1]
2 4 ms 2 ms 6 ms really.powerful.transmitter [192.168.1.0]
3 424 ms 527 ms 530 ms secret.router.on.the.moon.moo [127.0.0.2]
4 830 ms 832 ms 927 ms pwnt.by.brazil.sat.mil [403.406.408.410]
5 84 ms 79 ms 79 ms GOOGLE-INC.FTL.warp.Level3.net [4.71.20.22]
6 52 ms 53 ms 51 ms yx-in-f103.google.com [74.125.45.103]
Trace complete.
Parent
Re:Traceroute? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Nah, it's reserved for MOOs [wikipedia.org]. secret.router.on.the.moo.MOO is actually a text-based VR specializing in dusty conspiracy theory role-playing. And furries.
Banned VOIP (Score:2, Informative)
Welcome (Score:5, Funny)
Let me be the first to welcome you to the Mile High Virgin Club.
Any ideas what might be going on? (Score:5, Funny)
Any ideas from the slashdotters on what might be going on?
No. Is there anything else I can help you with?
Your choice (Score:5, Funny)
Any ideas from the slashdotters on what might be going on?
It's the "block the VOIP" feature which tested much more positively than "kill the annoying guy on the phone" with focus groups.
Compared to other bogus airline charges . . . (Score:2)
. . . you at least get something for the extra money.
As opposed to those other airline surcharges, like: extra baggage charge, security charge, too little baggage charge, late charge, early charge, right on time charge, homeland security charge, screaming kid charge, lack of screaming kid charge . . .
"Hello, and welcome to our flight. In order to ensure Homeland Security, alcoholic beverages will now cost $20 each. And non-alcoholic beverages will not be served."
"Our toilets are fitted with lapping se
Did you even try online gaming? (Score:2)
I tried this, it was good (Score:2)
Crypto (Score:2, Insightful)
You might want to try to vpn into work or home, then try to use Skype. Chances are they filtering what ports are allowed, so going through a crypto tunnel will remove this ability.
Re:Crypto (Score:4, Insightful)
I didn't added QoS into my original post. If you VPN into work or home you can remove their ability to filter or tag your connections through a VPN. By tunneling everything through a VPN it would be a true test since anyone with a clue will set crypto traffic with a high priority on a border network.
If it's still unusable it will be due to errors on the transmission, which with tcp would be classed as slowness. With UDP it would be missing packets that are not re-transmitted.
An analogy, in quake w/ tcp code you would hump a wall when lagged, but with udp you would teleport through the wall.
Parent
I hope (Score:2)
Or, better yet, offer a discounted rate for the above and make some or more of your money back
Your fellow passengers are thankful... (Score:2, Insightful)
Skype did not work for voice, even though I'm pretty sure those stats are over the minimums.
Next time try MSN messenger... (Score:4, Funny)
Latency would be *bad* (Score:3, Interesting)
The same with something in flight internet.
I would have been more interested in your pings to Google.com I bet they would have been rubbish.
Southwest airlines testing now (Score:5, Informative)
Southwest is testing Wi-Fi on four of its planes now. I was on one on a flight from Las Vegas to Baltimore. They sent me an email the day before telling me that the plane would have wi-fi and that it would be free during this test period.
The speed was fantastic, but I didn't benchmark it. However, I was able to do a video iChat with my wife at home. Didn't try to do any audio, just video.
The big drawback about Southwest is that their planes have no power outlets. Not sure if they're going to add them. But they're aware of the issue.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been working as a contractor for Aircell, the company behind the network, and it is not satellite, except for a few points. The network is 100 cell phone towers to T1 to internet. Max bandwidth is 3Mb. And yes VoIP is blocked for obvious reasons.
For more info, check out aircell.com.