I have a friend who is 'netting' his farm. He is putting in about 3000'
of fiber. This keeps away nasty ground loop problems. He has also set
up proper router protocols between his terrestial wireless provider
(about 5 miles away, line of site) and a Satellite internet provider, so
That is distributing broadband over the power line network. What was
being discussed here was purely for local distribution and very little
noise will get back up the power line. In general the meter has enough
inductance to block most of the signal.
Les
Rafael Skodlar wrote:
3. Broadband
Remember that the issue on ethernet will not be throughput; it will be
latency. I'm sure Jon can give you a profile of what he is doing.
How many bytes in a send packet?
How many bytes is a receive packet?
Cycle time?
I assume it would be acceptable to do something like:
1 -- Receive M byte
Gentlemen,
I have used BPL in my home for years. I am connected through it
now. I have wireless now but have not changed this box as it just
works.
My children played all their internet games through it without a
single complaint about speed or quality. They increased their speed by
adding
Kenneth Lerman wrote:
Remember that the issue on ethernet will not be throughput; it will be
latency. I'm sure Jon can give you a profile of what he is doing.
How many bytes in a send packet?
How many bytes is a receive packet?
Cycle time?
OK, the current latency is VERY short per
Stuart Stevenson wrote:
Gentlemen,
I have used BPL in my home for years. I am connected through it
now. I have wireless now but have not changed this box as it just
works.
snip
I don't know if this has interfered with any ham operators near me.
If my home adapters interfere how
-Original Message-
From: Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com
Sent: Dec 28, 2008 10:45 AM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Ethernet runs to barns and such
Gentlemen,
I have used BPL in my home for years. I am connected
Jon Elson wrote:
Kenneth Lerman wrote:
Remember that the issue on ethernet will not be throughput; it will be
latency. I'm sure Jon can give you a profile of what he is doing.
How many bytes in a send packet?
How many bytes is a receive packet?
Cycle time?
OK, the current latency
Grow up.
John Thornton wrote:
General questions are the hardest to answer. They are even harder to answer
when your not
asking about the subject of the mailing list.
Best plasma torch or best price... pick any one.
I use a Hypertherm 1250 and it was the best one for me.
You have to
Ho! Wah! We got a piss ant here, 'eh.
On Sun, 2008-12-28 at 20:07 -0500, ad...@mmri.us wrote:
Grow up.
John Thornton wrote:
General questions are the hardest to answer.
--
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
A standard ethernet frame has to be 512 bits (64 bytes) long. This
includes ethernet framing info, and I think the net payload is 46 bytes
for a minimum packet. This is aside from any UDP/IP or TCP/IP
addressing or protocol information. So you probably need at
If you can replace caps, i dont see why one couldnt build one of these.
Probably turn out cheaper than a commercial unit and be plenty accurate for
most of us troubleshooting.
http://ludens.cl/Electron/esr/esr.html
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Greg Michalski
About says it all.
Ray Henry wrote:
Ho! Wah! We got a piss ant here, 'eh.
On Sun, 2008-12-28 at 20:07 -0500, ad...@mmri.us wrote:
Grow up.
John Thornton wrote:
General questions are the hardest to answer.
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
I don't know the specifics of how to deal with the incoming packets on
the PC (or the specifics of how to send them, for that matter :) ), but
I'm pretty sure data throughput won't be an issue. Latency is unlikely
to be either, unless there's some very complex
Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
A standard ethernet frame has to be 512 bits (64 bytes) long. This
includes ethernet framing info, and I think the net payload is 46 bytes
for a minimum packet. This is aside from any UDP/IP or TCP/IP
addressing or protocol
Jon,
Don't use rtnet. Just use ethernet point to point to replace a parallel
port. Then there is NO net stack. Just use raw ethernet packets.
Overhead is then a few dozen bytes.
Ken
Jon Elson wrote:
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
I don't know the specifics of how to deal with the incoming
Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
A standard ethernet frame has to be 512 bits (64 bytes) long. This
includes ethernet framing info, and I think the net payload is 46 bytes
for a minimum packet. This is aside from any UDP/IP or TCP/IP
addressing or protocol
Jon Elson wrote:
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
I don't know the specifics of how to deal with the incoming packets on
the PC (or the specifics of how to send them, for that matter :) ), but
I'm pretty sure data throughput won't be an issue. Latency is unlikely
to be either, unless there's
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
[snip]
bound on data size, which gives an upper bound on transmit duration.
Uh, an upper bound on servo cycle rate. Geez.
- Steve
--
___
Kenneth Lerman wrote:
Jon,
Don't use rtnet. Just use ethernet point to point to replace a parallel
port. Then there is NO net stack. Just use raw ethernet packets.
Overhead is then a few dozen bytes.
OK, but is there an ethernet driver that is callable within the rt
environment?
I may
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
I agree with Ken - you don't need RTNet unless you want to have multiple
slave devices and all that stuff. It could still be useful since the
master defines the timebase (at least in one mode, AFAIK), so the master
could send one sync packet, then have all the
On Sunday 28 December 2008, Jim Coleman wrote:
If you can replace caps, i dont see why one couldnt build one of these.
Probably turn out cheaper than a commercial unit and be plenty accurate for
most of us troubleshooting.
http://ludens.cl/Electron/esr/esr.html
That circuit is similar to the
22 matches
Mail list logo
