From: Dave (dfisher_at_pophost.com)
Date: 2002-02-28 02:57:03
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 10:05:59 +1000, John Morrison wrote:
>> Why not stick to TCP/IP ? I was piping data sampled at 5kHz over my
>> ethernet via TCP/IP between my laptop and desktop without problems.
>> Why make it more complex if the simple option works ? It would be
>> better to delay the analysis than to try and patch up a stream with
>> holes in it.
>Well as the data stream is tiny TCP would work very well.
>I thought from the way Dave suggested UDP that there was a LOT of data.
My concern was one of speed. There is a lot of handshaking going on in the TCP
connection that would introduce added latency from the point that your brain
produced the data and the receiving processor finally got the data. All this
is theory at this point. If the EEG data can be transmitted quickly "enough"
to make a usable session (i.e., reward/inhibit protocol, or some other
responsive element from a biofeedback system) via TCP, then yes -- that would
be the best and easiest solution. Packet reconstruction, synchronization,
etc., is all taken care of in the TCP protocol.
Dave.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:39 BST