[Nimi]

A few random thoughts/questions:

- This sounds similar to the incast problem which occurs in datacenters, but this happens on consumer Internet - cool.

- After reading both this post and the TCP/NC paper, it seems to me like TCP/NC is unfair to vanilla TCP. If all TCP/NC does is send the same number of packets, but the packets are "more sophisticated" encodings of the original data, link utilization would be the same. So apparently, TCP/NC is more aggressive than vanilla TCP, and that's fine, but I think it should be acknowledged (haha). When they say stuff like "TCP doesn’t see the packet loss, and as a result there’s no need for the TCP senders to reduce their sending rates", it's a bit unclear what they mean - you can just as well modify the TCP stack to ignore the packet loss and not reduce the sending rate, without network coding.

- Why not use TCP termination? You could install a performance-enhancing proxy at the Sat gate, and make sure the link is always 100% utilized.

- "Let’s increase the queue memory" - I thought this should theoretically work. See for example http://yuba.stanford.edu/~nickm/papers/sigcomm2004.pdf. If folks familiar with the apnic effort are reading, I would love to know if they tried such measures and what happened.

- Could CoDel improve the situation here?