3 ms·
wireless networks alone aren't going to be sufficient to build a large-scale mesh network that could disrupt existing ISPs. The latency alone makes this infeasi
by lotsofmangos 13y ago
wireless networks alone aren't going to be sufficient to build a large-scale mesh network that could disrupt existing ISPs. The latency alone makes this infeasible.
I'm not so sure, your links are almost c, whereas optic fiber is substantially slower, so it depends entirely on how little processing you can get away with in the message passing code.
edit - was just thinking about this, an arm cortex runs at ~ 2,000 MIPS, which gives you just under 15 cm per instruction for radio in air. Fiber is about a third slower, so your links do not actually have to be massively long to give you quite a few cycles to play with.
- jsaxton86 13y agoI think it mostly depends upon the range of each of the nodes. If your nodes have an average range of 820 feet (the range of 802.11n (in good weather, I assume)), and you have 1 node exactly every 820 feet between NY and SF, that's over 16,000 links. If each link has 10ms of latency, that's 16s of latency.
- ZenoArrow 13y ago16s of latency is interesting to think about, do think we'll get around this issue with local web page caching (obviously won't work for non turn-based games). SyncNet or something similar could prove very useful... http://jack.minardi.org/software/syncnet-a-decentralized-web-browser/ http://jack.minardi.org/software/syncnet-a-decentralized-web...
- ris 13y agoIt's got nothing to do with the propagation speed. Wireless has high latency because it requires comparatively high amounts of processing, has to operate over a shared channel (requiring collision avoidance), is subject to unexpected interference...
- adestefan 13y agoYou also need to send a lot of additional information for error correction.