[TI-H] Re: TI Networking.
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
[TI-H] Re: TI Networking.
Don't we only need 28 bits though? 1 byte of the seven is the calculator
version (89 or 92+), 2 more bytes are a verification number, and 4 bits are
hardware revision. (Using AB_serno in TI-GCC.)
This still is a little large though. Is there any other way to uniquely
identify the calculator?
B Clark
----- Original Message -----
From: Adam Thayer <krevinek@matrix-z.net>
To: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 2:00 PM
Subject: [TI-H] Re: TI Networking.
>
> --- Olle Hedman <oh@hem.passagen.se>
> > wrote:
> >
> >At 18:48 2001-05-05, you wrote:
> >>one way to provide distinct addresses for each calculator would be using
> >>the built-in ID#; i don't
> >>know how to get to it but I'm sure there's a way. if the network was
set
> >>up in a way with each
> >>calc having an address and a packet being sent to just one calc with the
> >>address in the header,
> >>this could be helpful...
> >>jeff
> >
> >The problem with this is that it is a bit too large number.
> >rediculous to send 56 bits (7 bytes) just for adress.
>
> Then don't send the whole thing. Hash the 56 bits into a checksum or other
nifty byte/nibble format that will retain the uniqueness of the Calc.
Exactly how without encountering a duplicate at least once, I dunno. (Maybe
increment if a duplicate is found?) But starting with the Calc's ID number
is a great idea. If the network hub is only about 4 ports or 8, you can
actually hash it down to 2-3 bits and increment when collisions occur (one
will get the address before another) and actually put the hub into the state
of a basic router sending packets to the right addresses, which is
practically required with the TI's small bandwidth potential.
Follow-Ups:
References: