Stewart Stremler wrote: > I thought it was jitter? I thought the ear could handle dropouts, but > time-variance turned it all into noise?
True, jitter can be a problem also. Usually you digitize and send in 20ms packets or 50 per second. So you may not notice a few dropped packets, especially if they don't all happen at once. And normally if packets arrive out of order they are dropped. There might be algorithms for trying to smooth over dropped packets, I'm not sure. But VOIP implementations can and often do try to measure latency and implement a jitter buffer. It adds a bit of latency depending on how big the buffer is but it works similar to a buffer on a CD player (remember CD players and skipping?) so that by adding a little delay the buffer can put packets back in order and play them at a continuous speed so the ear does not hear any errors. But if latency varies too widely (jitter) the buffer could run out or overflow and cause drops. > Do I have that backwards? You have it right. I just expounded a little more above for the benefit of others. > /me thinks of _Ender's Game_ Oh, to have faster than light transmission capability... But I would settle for having a pair of entangled particles. Imagine if we could construct point to point links to anywhere in the universe by just meeting up with a friend, exchanging entangled particles, and keeping our collection of entangled particles with us wherever we went. Instant fast, unstoppable, and unsnoopable bandwidth. Sure, there would still be lightspeed latency, but you it would be one heck of a p2p network. -- Tracy "Still trying to confound The Man" Reed http://copilotconsulting.com -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
