Embedded Internet enabling methods: Which?
Dale Botkin email (remove spam text)
On Tue, 30 May 2000, Jilles Oldenbeuving wrote:
PPP, IP and UDP are not terribly difficult to implement, and are quite
useful. However, you can't run SMTP or http over UDP, they require TCP.
TCP is more involved if you do it completely.
> I don't think for this an x86 processor will be needed... ofcourse if you
> want to implement
> more web-functionality, more *memory* will be needed. But as mentioned
> before, not more MIPS,
> becouse i think that one isn't going to connect it's application via an
> T1-line to the internet, so
> speed should not be an issue.....
Agreed. To do fully compliant TCP, you'd need a LOT more memory. If I
weren't so fond of PICs now I'd be tempted to go back to an 8051 and ang a
big EPROM to do TCP. Instead, I plan to cheat like hell, use very small
packets and make it *work* like TCP, even if it's not RFC compliant.
It would all be much, much easier with an X86 DOS or Linux platform, maybe
one of those neat little PC104 systems or something. But none of them
even remotely approach the cost per unit of using a PIC, and the actual
TCP requirements in my project are so rudimentary it would be very
difficult to justfy the extra expense, power, and size. That's "very
difficult" as in "totally impossible". Besides - where's the challenge in
making a DOS or Linux box speak TCP?
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..."
-- Isaac Asimov
In reply to: <006001bfca52$23e67ca0$3e653dc3@oldenbeuvingpc>
See also: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=which
You must be a member of the
piclist mailing list
(not only a www.piclist.com member) to post to the