<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2>One of the biggest issues I find in a discussion like this is the "mixed
units confusion" :)<SPAN
class=140170402-17092002> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2><SPAN
class=140170402-17092002></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2><SPAN class=140170402-17092002>And they get more confusing. In
terms of RAM capacity, HDD capacity or program data usage, "kilo" is taken to
mean 2^10, or 1024, "mega" is 2^20, etc. However, in communications,
"kilo" has the more conventional value of 1000. So in terms of throughput,
kbps = 1000 bits per second, Mbps = 1000000 bits per second, and for the
record... the much maligned "mbps" = 0.001 bits per second (or 1 bit every 1000
seconds), since lower case "m" =
"milli" .</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff>People often talk about "Megs" or whatever
without specifying (or sometimes even knowing) the units they are talking
about, eg. MB (mega bytes = 1024kilobytes</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff>), Mb (megabits),</FONT> <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff>MHz
(megahertz), Mbps (megabits per second) or MBps (mega bytes per second). When
the possible ranges are great enough, such as in networking bandwidth,
confusion can reign.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2>Cameron's suggestions are most helpful: he suggests NOT to talk about
throughput in terms of bits per second, but to use Bytes per second.<SPAN
class=140170402-17092002> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2><SPAN
class=140170402-17092002></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV dir=ltr><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT
color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN class=140170402-17092002>That's probably
helpful,and aided by the fact that common tools (including web browsers) express
throughput in bytes/sec.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2><SPAN
class=140170402-17092002> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=460294601-17092002>To put this in context, Michaels' explanation of
overheads and latency helped.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=460294601-17092002>I suggest we use a little more "discipline" and put
the "ps" at the end of the unit to identify speed rather than volume when
talking about transfer performances and use "B" instead of "b" to refer to
"Bytes" (=8+1+1or 0 bits or = 7+1+1or2 bits) and "bits" (= binary digits = 1
or 0).</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=460294601-17092002>I'd be interested know in this context how big (in
bits) each frame and packet identifier is and how many are needed in
each - say - kilobit or kilobyte of transmitted
data.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2>We might then get a better idea of comparing apples with apples.... I
get around 350kbps sustained data rate on my 802.11b 11Mbps network,
using a single AP and network client. MUCH lower than the 3+ Mbps of a wired
10Mbps Ethernet link!<SPAN
class=140170402-17092002> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV dir=ltr><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT
color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN class=140170402-17092002>3 Mbps on
Ethernet? I've had much higher - certainly in excess of 700
kByte/sec, which translates to 5.6Mbps. I get 4Mbps (500kbyte/sec)
downloading from cable and across my wired
Ethernet.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT
color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=140170402-17092002></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><SPAN class=460294601-17092002><FONT face=Arial><FONT
color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN class=140170402-17092002>Wireless throughput
under ideal conditions (quiet channel, 2 stations) has consistently been
measured at around 600 kByte/sec by many parties, including
myself.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV></BODY></HTML>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>---<BR>
Outgoing mail ihas been scanned for Viruses<BR>
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).<BR>
Version: 6.0.389 / Virus Database: 220 - Release Date: 16/09/2002<BR>
</FONT> </P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient.</FONT></P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.</FONT></P>
<BR>