On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <[email protected]> wrote: > "that's a few radio hops away from anywhere. And that's one reason why > per-hop latency is all-critical" > > To put things in context... from what we have seen typical latency between > radios (for a single link) are between 1ms to 2ms... The Moto Canopy are an > exception they have much higher latency....because of what they do and how > they do it.... so even if you are going thru 20 radios.. you are talking > about 15-20 ms ....
per-hop performance may be thougher than per-hop latency... it usually divides by 2, so n hops would be 1/2^n performance of the main node. Which could be fine if you can provide fairness to prevent a kind of capture effect of the nearest nodes. Rubens -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
