Latency

[mgr0sz834]

JamKazam is very cool!  Need some help or clarification with network response.  A couple of months back, I could connect with acceptable latency.  Now, the app always reports my latency as 30ms+.  My speedtest is showing 1Gb/sec.  Pings to you show 40ms+ average.  A tracerte to a dallas.nodebalancer shows about 2ms response time and then shows no further network devices.  I suspect the latency is not on my side?  Is that to be expected at the current time?  I understand you have a lot of activity.  I can connect fine and start a session, albeit with the notice my latency is high on my gear.  

I noted the port forwarding posts but it was working perfectly before and UDP ports shouldn't be causing latency issues.  

I can connect, it's just the latency shown in the session by the app.  Is the latency shown in the app the actual latency, or is it a false indication?

Please advise.  Content to wait if it is a network performance or server capacity issue on your side.  Happy Easter!  

Thanks!

Mark

[Dimitri Muskens]

JamKazam is very cool!  Need some help or clarification with network response.  A couple of months back, I could connect with acceptable latency.  Now, the app always reports my latency as 30ms+.  My speedtest is showing 1Gb/sec.  Pings to you show 40ms+ average.  A tracerte to a dallas.nodebalancer shows about 2ms response time and then shows no further network devices.  I suspect the latency is not on my side?  Is that to be expected at the current time?  I understand you have a lot of activity.  I can connect fine and start a session, albeit with the notice my latency is high on my gear.  

I noted the port forwarding posts but it was working perfectly before and UDP ports shouldn't be causing latency issues.  

I can connect, it's just the latency shown in the session by the app.  Is the latency shown in the app the actual latency, or is it a false indication?

Please advise.  Content to wait if it is a network performance or server capacity issue on your side.  Happy Easter!  

Thanks!

Mark

>>>
The jkz app creates a p2p session with the people you're connecting/playing with. So the server takes no part in that and therefore does not add any latency to the situation.
Your latency being 30+ is worth investigating. Where are you picking up this delay? Is it jitter, is in your gear or in your internet/network connection? The total latency of a p2p connection should be as low as you can get it. Typically anything under 20ms will be a very 'playable' situation.
Your gear should be (way)under 10ms really to have any chance of reaching the above.

[mgr0sz834]

JamKazam is very cool!  Need some help or clarification with network response.  A couple of months back, I could connect with acceptable latency.  Now, the app always reports my latency as 30ms+.  My speedtest is showing 1Gb/sec.  Pings to you show 40ms+ average.  A tracerte to a dallas.nodebalancer shows about 2ms response time and then shows no further network devices.  I suspect the latency is not on my side?  Is that to be expected at the current time?  I understand you have a lot of activity.  I can connect fine and start a session, albeit with the notice my latency is high on my gear.  

I noted the port forwarding posts but it was working perfectly before and UDP ports shouldn't be causing latency issues.  

I can connect, it's just the latency shown in the session by the app.  Is the latency shown in the app the actual latency, or is it a false indication?

Please advise.  Content to wait if it is a network performance or server capacity issue on your side.  Happy Easter!  

Thanks!

Mark

>>>
The jkz app creates a p2p session with the people you're connecting/playing with. So the server takes no part in that and therefore does not add any latency to the situation.
Your latency being 30+ is worth investigating. Where are you picking up this delay? Is it jitter, is in your gear or in your internet/network connection? The total latency of a p2p connection should be as low as you can get it. Typically anything under 20ms will be a very 'playable' situation.
Your gear should be (way)under 10ms really to have any chance of reaching the above.

>>>

Thanks for the explanation of the P2P scenario.  I'm using a Universal Audio Twin MKII Quad so it should be good unless I have a setting wrong.  Otherwise, both ends of our P2P are high speed.  I'm running MacOS Catalina on an iMac (my studio machine).  I wired up directly to my Verizon router.  Any thoughts?

Mark

[GDJ]

Interesting conversation. I've read elsewhere it's P2P, but have not see any proof of this, other then JK members sharing the information. I'm okay with being wrong when I say, regardless of what people are saying about P2P, the app is calling home somewhere to broker everything.

I'll have to check the original videos the developers put together years ago but I don't recall any of them taking a deep dive into the details of the application. That said, compared to some other jamming apps, JK does not strike me as a thin client due to all the social networking bells and whistles; chat, notification pop up, recording abilities, etc. I have to assume all contribute to CPU and network usage and affect latency, since they are sharing the same connection. I'm just starting to check out the Manage menu networking options and setting up client pairing to another user in the same ISP network.

[Hans Peter Augustesen]

Interesting conversation. I've read elsewhere it's P2P, but have not see any proof of this, other then JK members sharing the information. I'm okay with being wrong when I say, regardless of what people are saying about P2P, the app is calling home somewhere to broker everything.

I'll have to check the original videos the developers put together years ago but I don't recall any of them taking a deep dive into the details of the application. That said, compared to some other jamming apps, JK does not strike me as a thin client due to all the social networking bells and whistles; chat, notification pop up, recording abilities, etc. I have to assume all contribute to CPU and network usage and affect latency, since they are sharing the same connection. I'm just starting to check out the Manage menu networking options and setting up client pairing to another user in the same ISP network.

It is fairly easy to get a hard proof of that the audio and video transmission goes directly from person to person - and not through the server. That it is peer-to-peer.

But that is not needed. Pure logic can do the trick.

When I am playing with another person 100 meters from me, the total latency between him and me is around 15 milliseconds.

15 milliseconds is the amount of time it takes for the light to travel 4.500 kilometers.

From me in Denmark to the server in Texas, USA is 8.500 kilometers.

And back again to my neighbour is another 8.500 kilometers.

Total : 17.000 kilometer.

It will take at least 50 milliseconds for the light to travel that 17.000 kilometer.

On top of that comes that the average speed of the datatransmisson in the optic cables + hubs and nodes is NOT 300.000 kilometers per second, but rather 100.000 or 150.000 - due to physical etc. limitations.

If the audio and video transmission was going through the server, the latency between my neighbour and me would then be 125-170 milliseconds.

So the conclusion is: JamKazams transmission of sound and video can ONLY be peer-to-peer.

It can NOT be through the server.

[GDJ]

Hans, Thanks and i see your point. What are you thoughts then, on how the social networking features are handled? Do you think messaging, notifications, and other non session actives are P2P, or handled by a server brokering these functions? I have to believe these other features as well as our profiles are stored and manage on centralized on servers.

Also, It seems like in order to get on Jamkazam and other online jamming platforms, ideally one has some technical aptitude with their equipment. That said, I'm personally intrigued by everything and wish the developers would share what the network topology is. I realize it is unlikely we'll find out but it would help with what I refer to as "proof", to learn about the system from the developers.

[Hans Peter Augustesen]

There can be no doubt about that the social networking features; messaging, notifications, emails and other non session actives are not peer-to-peer or P2P.

It dont need very much explanation - and I am busy now, so that must be another time, if needed.

They must - as you think - be handled by the server.

Maybe you find interest or "proof" in these two links. The second is very long and technical. I have not read it all.

Both are about the special methods JamKazam are using. Patented technic or technology

https://patents.justia.com/assignee/jamkazam-inc

Packet Rate Control And Related Systems For Interactive Music Systems
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2015/0256473.html

I may return - if and so ... It is a big and interesting topic, yes