Thanks for your prompt answer!
I will try to decipher what you claim:
I quote: â??The probability of failure of the single packet burst is higher than that of other packets in a multi packet burstâ?.
Since the bursting algorithm fails after the first un-successful single packet transmission, the success rate of any burst transmission is limited only by the success rate of each single package transmission. Each single packet transmission in a burst consists of up to 5 acknowledged packet transmission attempts before the burst is considered failed. This means that you have to multiply the probability of success of each single packet burst transmission N number of times in an N packet burst transmission. If Iâ??m not totally off here, this means that the more packets you transmit in a burst sequence the lower the chance of success. Or in other words, the highest chance of success for a burst sequence is if the burst only consists of a single packet!
It might be that some internal or hidden retransmission takes placed over the air for a standard acknowledged packet transmission â?? but faced with the public info that I can deduct from the ANT specification, bursting a single packet would have a 5 times better chance of success than that of a standard acknowledged packet â?? simply because the engine retries 5 times before giving up.
This leads me to the logical conclusion that, with-in one radio timeslot, a burst consisting of only one packet would have the absolute highest chance of success compared to ANY other ANT transmission method.
You claim the exact opposite!
Could you please try to come up with some facts that support your claims?
I would really hate to use a system or a protocol that I cannot understand.
Best regards
BioLife
PS: If you donâ??t want to change the behavior of the protocol due to backwards compatibility issues thatâ??s fair enough, but one might also add a system setting that could open up for my suggested bursting behavior and let that system setting default to the old way.