Hi, On Thursday 24 December 2009 01:48:14 Patrick Shirkey wrote: > On 12/24/2009 11:31 AM, Arnold Krille wrote: > > On Wednesday 23 December 2009 23:52:46 Patrick Shirkey wrote: > >> So the issue is with other streams being picked up by the receiver which > >> affects latency by increasing collisions? > >> Would this still be a problem on a secured connection? Surely the > >> receiver would ignore all data that is not being transmitted over the > >> secured access point? > > No, the problem is one or two layers deeper in the stack. We are talking > > wifi here. No matter if there is only two devices on that network or a > > secure connection, its still wireless transmission over radio frequencies > > in the 2GHz range. Which is per se much more affected by any disturbance > > then a dedicated cable is. Every mobile phone, every blue-tooth device, > > every neighbours network, every iron in your ceiling will influence this. > > And not only with a constant background-noise in your frequency range, > > but also with momentary scrambling and such stuff. So in the layers you > > can not (easily) control by software there is already lots of resending > > and rescheduling of packets. And all these introduce uncertainties and > > latencies you don't want in your audio transmission. Unless you can do > > with 100ms latency and more... > > This is good analysis. Thanks for taking the time. > > Is that number 100ms a real number or just an estimate?
I was once taught that a good estimate for an error is better then a bad calculation. This number is a guess from my understanding and experience of networks and the osi layers... > > But getting the stream to be reliable is already complicated with things > > like firewire (which has isochronous channels for exactly this purpose) > > and its more complicated with usb (which has a master telling the clients > > when to send bigger payloads to not disturb the other bus-members). Ask > > the jack-over-udp guys how difficult it is to create such stream reliably > > over tcp-ip network. And they take lost packets into account (which means > > an xrun) and advise you to use it on dedicated networks if you want more > > the the immediate experience... > In this case are we comparing a network located over large distances > with internet nodes in between or a couple of computers sitting within a > couple of meters of each other? Comparing local wired network and local wifi... Have fun, Arnold
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev