| Pat Regan on 9 Oct 2005 04:59:24 -0000 |
|
Michael C. Toren wrote: > There are a few ways in which the latency can be lowered -- for example, > by using asynchronous routing whereby inbound packets are received via the > high-throughput, high-latency satellite link, and outbound packets are > sent via a low-throughput, low-latency link, such as a modem. However, > the impression I have when looking at the closednetworks.com website is > that they are not utilizing satellite links, but rather fixed-wireless > links within the city. > I don't usually think of a dialup modem as low latency :). I believe I misspoke earlier. I said that the satellite adds 500ms. What I should have said was that it adds 500ms in each direction. If you are using a modem for the uplink, you will get 500ms additional latency on the downlink. If you use the satellite for both, you get 500ms in each direction for a total of an entire second. I don't know about you, but I get annoyed when the latency on an ssh session gets up near 400ms :). >> It would also be nearly useless for IP Telephony. > > Ever make overseas phone calls? :-) I get annoyed enough with the latency on cell phone to cell phone calls :p. I'd hate to have to deal with something worse for every local call :). Pat Attachment:
signature.asc ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|