Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]
From: Nicol So (nobody@no.spam.please)
Date: 02/25/03
- Next message: Andrew Swallow: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Previous message: Michael Amling: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- In reply to: Rob Warnock: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Next in thread: Rob Warnock: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Reply: Rob Warnock: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Nicol So <nobody@no.spam.please> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 23:08:18 -0500
Rob Warnock wrote:
>
> p.s. Note that "baud" is used above with the meaning of symbols per second.
> Technically, it's defined as "the reciprocal of the smallest signalling
> interval", but only inefficient encoding schemes send less than one symbol
> per signalling interval, so for conversational purposes: baud == symbols/s.
I don't think that's correct. In the definition I'm familiar with, one
baud equals one signaling event per second. It's not defined in terms of
the shortest inter-event interval. (There's a difference between the two
definitions, because signaling events need not happen at regular
intervals.)
-- Nicol So Disclaimer: Views expressed here are casual comments and should not be relied upon as the basis for decisions of consequence.
- Next message: Andrew Swallow: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Previous message: Michael Amling: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- In reply to: Rob Warnock: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Next in thread: Rob Warnock: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Reply: Rob Warnock: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]