List,

I am not sure if anyone has collected some serious data on audio latency. On
 seeing some latency
mails on this list, I am getting skeptical about the quality of audio on FMS
. We are developing a
two-user virtual classroom application with 2-way audio and 2-way whiteboard
. Our server is in
Dallas and within US, on broadband connections we experience latency of about 50-70ms on eac
h side.
>From India for the same servers the latency is around 350ms.
I was wondering if someone could answer:
1.	Has someone collected latency data for a 2-way audio application on FCS/F
MS?
2.	Does FMS make any improvements for audio latency?
3.	What is an acceptable range of latency for 2-way audio communication?
4.	Should the
5.	Are there any pointers as to what we should keep in mind while hosting or
 developing this
app?
6.	Is there anything that the clients can do in their network to reduce late
ncy?

Thanks,
Harman
 ________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm

Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Harman Singh wrote:
> Our server is in
> Dallas and within US, on broadband connections we experience latency of ab
out 50-70ms on each side. 
> I was wondering if someone could answer:
> 1.	Has someone collected latency data for a 2-way audio application on FCS
/FMS?
>
it strongly (99,9%) depends on network latency.
> 2.	Does FMS make any improvements for audio latency?
>
no, it does the opposite! Since it uses TCP for delivering packets you
will get higher delays when there are packet losses.
The positive thing is that you won't lose any packet.
The (very) negative thing is that you will not be able to use your
conferencing systen when you network connection is not VERY good.
The (very) negative thing 2 is that when you won't be able to talk with
FMS you will be able to talk PERFECTLY with skype, msn and so on (UDP
protocol)
> 3.	What is an acceptable range of latency for 2-way audio communication?
>
0.1s is good
0.3s is decent
0.5s is acceptable
1sec is quite bad
> 6.	Is there anything that the clients can do in their network to reduce la
tency?
>
it may be... they may be using proxies/firewalls/antivirus which slows
down packets or creates packet losses.
Typical example is MS ISA Server 2003... or some specific configurations
of TrendMicro antivirus.
There are too many cases to write down a list 

Good luck!
Dario De Agostini

 ________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm

Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi,

I really don't think you can have a good quality video/audio conference
between US and India when you have the server in the US. If your server is
on a high level network that has excellent connection to India, perhaps
dedicated line bandwidth with several major global carriers, fine, this is
realizable. Otherwise FCS/FMS really can't do better than Skype....

If you know a little about global networking and how datacenters connect
with each other... you would know that international bandwidth costs lots o=
f
$$$.

Most countries have cheap rates for local bandwidth and it's usually stable
and covering the entire country... however... going into international is a
totally different story.

... to have FCS/FMS as a global service or between 2 very distant regions
would require more servers at different locations, each with dedicated
bandwidth with major global carriers...


best regards,

Peter Wu


On 4/20/06, Dario De Agostini <dario-GCN6p6BpY0//wltNWqQaag@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Harman Singh wrote: 
> about 50-70ms on each side. 
> on FCS/FMS? 
> it strongly (99,9%) depends on network latency. 
> no, it does the opposite! Since it uses TCP for delivering packets you
> will get higher delays when there are packet losses.
> The positive thing is that you won't lose any packet.
> The (very) negative thing is that you will not be able to use your
> conferencing systen when you network connection is not VERY good.
> The (very) negative thing 2 is that when you won't be able to talk with
> FMS you will be able to talk PERFECTLY with skype, msn and so on (UDP
> protocol) 
> communication? 
> 0.1s is good
> 0.3s is decent
> 0.5s is acceptable
> 1sec is quite bad 
> reduce latency? 
> it may be... they may be using proxies/firewalls/antivirus which slows
> down packets or creates packet losses.
> Typical example is MS ISA Server 2003... or some specific configurations
> of TrendMicro antivirus.
> There are too many cases to write down a list 
>
> Good luck!
> Dario De Agostini
>
>  ________________________________________
_______
> FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> http://www.figleaf.com
> http://training.figleaf.com
>
 ________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm

Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]