There's a few things that are inaccurate here.  First is the "Ground rules" statement referred to my inability to give hard numbers, not to test protocol.  This is an important point and at the time I was aware of no one who was confused by that statement or I would have clarified it.

Secondly, the building we have been in is my office building, not the data center, thus why there is wifi available.  Also why I know what the wifi available in that building is and what it congestion rate is.  At no time have we (BFL and I) been to the data center and I don't believe I have stated we have done any testing inside the data center at this point.

The "small demo" was NOT a live demo, and I stated as much.  It was a demo of me taking (by hand) a dataset from my pool and pasting it into the mining testbed to return the nonces I reported and offered to independent verification.

I thought I had mentioned it, but perhaps not, I have yet to receive software source that will compile from BFL.  The one set of software I received and reviewed would not compile and I am suppose to receive a new codeset this weekend.  However, given the nature of the codeset and it's author, I'm inclined to believe that is more likely legit than not, but that does not mean I will not be reviewing it regardless.