Running Cable Question

[JR]

Just throwing another variable on the pile...

I router with 802.11b/g interface could add latency (delay), depending on the setup.

If one installed a device with 802.11 on one side and ethernet on the other, then connected that ethernet interface to the cable modem, delay is definitely added to the link. Even if Carlos' 1 ms as all that's added, it would be cumulative for all packets required in a shooting transaction (I have no idea how many packets are required to accomplish this). I can see how this would result in a "spongy" feel.

Alternatively, if the cable modem itself had a wireless interface, there would not likely be any added delay.

No matter the configuration, setting up the filter on the router for MAC address filtering will be the fastest.

JR

[Carlos]

If one installed a device with 802.11 on one side and ethernet on the other, then connected that ethernet interface to the cable modem, delay is definitely added to the link.

Normally the router is the wireless device, which means there are no additional devices in the link. The input from the wireless or wired side of the same router will have the same real-world latency in this configuration and this context.

Even if Carlos' 1 ms as all that's added, it would be cumulative for all packets required in a shooting transaction (I have no idea how many packets are required to accomplish this).

Only one packet is used. It's UDP, so there's not even a TCP answer packet. The game sends one "shoot" packet and that's it. The server then sends back one "I shot" packet.

I can see how this would result in a "spongy" feel.

Only if something is broken. All else being equal, and working properly, there will be no difference between wired and wireless in this context.

Alternatively, if the cable modem itself had a wireless interface, there would not likely be any added delay.

Most people go from the modem to a router with wired and/or wireless connections. The packet input to that router from wired or wireless will be nearly identical (identical in this context).

No matter the configuration, setting up the filter on the router for MAC address filtering will be the fastest.

Agreed. It's very weak security, but unless you're a target for hacking it's sufficient for home use.

My own home network has two access points. An Apple 802.11n router running on 5GHz wireless for the primary (and modern computers that can handle it), which uses WPA. There's also an 802.11G access point for the gaming machines and wi-fi phones, that has no encryption but uses MAC restrictions for access control.

Wood-related topic: The wi-fi phones are great to carry out into the shop.

[JR]

Wood-related topic: The wi-fi phones are great to carry out into the shop.

Well, now that this cabling thread has been completely hijacked...

Wi-fi phones, eh? Tell me more. Are these connected directly to an IP service? Is there a telco interface off your network? How does this work?

JR

[Carlos]

They are VoIP phones. LOML and I own a small VoIP-based phone company ( www.televolve.com ). For general consumer use you can connect them to any VoIP-based service or you can use a local IP-PSTN gateway/router, or both. There are few cheap devices that can tie in VoIP and local service (though really, there's no reason to have local PSTN service any more). They run between $130 and $300 depending on features and extras.

[JR]

They are VoIP phones.

Got it.

FYI - back in the '90s I was a product manager for a VoIP gateway product line. I'm not involved too much in that space any more, but find it interesting to keep up.

Nice web site. Very clear messaging, well targeted.

JR

[Greg.B]

You guys are way over my head on this, but my answer to all of it is, that 99% of gamers I play with are hardwired. I'm sure they all can't be wrong. I'm going to find out if anyone I know plays wireless.

[rnelson0]

The only potential lag point is the encryption/decryption process

That's true, if you completely ignore all interference, noise, and crappy hardware that's out there. In reality, wireless is more variable than ethernet. Even if the latency is equal or lower, it's the jitter that causes a problem. Most games these days have sophisticated netcode that tries to even out latency between all players, so that the 5 guys with 5ms latency are on par with the guys between 50 and 300ms latency. If your latency is not steady and is changing, it often results in poorer performance than that of a higher but steadier latency.

Greg is absolutely correct in looking for an ethernet connection to his router. Wireless has advantages, but low latency and low jitter at the same time is not one of them. Besides, it's what he wants to do!

[Carlos]

I generally find it easier to buy a good router and properly configure it than to run cable, but everyone makes their own choices. I don't think the OP made a bad choice, but just making the point that wireless done right is a perfectly valid choice also.