| 1 |
199 |
simons |
|
| 2 |
|
|
(2nd attempt. 1st bounced.)
|
| 3 |
|
|
Hi again
|
| 4 |
|
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
About my previous mail: I've looked into parallel.asm, and I'm
|
| 6 |
|
|
rather confused. Looks like the code agrees with you, but not
|
| 7 |
|
|
the protocol description preceding it?? I got to look more
|
| 8 |
|
|
careful, but it wont be for a while (approx a week).
|
| 9 |
|
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
>From plip.c (v0.04):
|
| 11 |
|
|
|
| 12 |
|
|
>make one yourself. The wiring is:
|
| 13 |
|
|
> INIT 16 - 16 SLCTIN 17 - 17
|
| 14 |
|
|
> GROUND 25 - 25
|
| 15 |
|
|
> D0->ERROR 2 - 15 15 - 2
|
| 16 |
|
|
|
| 17 |
|
|
I saw you removed 1 and 14 from the cable description, but not
|
| 18 |
|
|
16 and 17. Why is that?
|
| 19 |
|
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
Have been successful in getting parallel.com working (the Messy-Loss
|
| 21 |
|
|
software). Using the pksend on the sender and pkall/pkwatch/whatnot
|
| 22 |
|
|
gives me a hung receiver. (The cable works, I've tried unet11, a DOS
|
| 23 |
|
|
cheap-net prog.)
|
| 24 |
|
|
|
| 25 |
|
|
Using PLIP v0.03 and trying to ping the other end gives
|
| 26 |
|
|
88 timeout 88 timeout....(more) 2386 bogus packet size, dropped
|
| 27 |
|
|
on the receiver, and on the sender lots of timeout, but of
|
| 28 |
|
|
course I don't know how much is supposed to work.
|
| 29 |
|
|
|
| 30 |
|
|
The following to something I wrote when I should have gone to bed a
|
| 31 |
|
|
long time ago. Use it for whatever you like, or dump it in the bin. ;^)
|
| 32 |
|
|
|
| 33 |
|
|
/Tommy
|
| 34 |
|
|
-----
|
| 35 |
|
|
Becker [& Co] proudly presents PLIP
|
| 36 |
|
|
|
| 37 |
|
|
What is PLIP?
|
| 38 |
|
|
=============
|
| 39 |
|
|
|
| 40 |
|
|
PLIP is Parallel Line IP, that is, the transportation of IP packages
|
| 41 |
|
|
over a parallel port. In the case of a PC, the obvious choice is the
|
| 42 |
|
|
printer port. PLIP is a non-standard, but [can use] uses the standard
|
| 43 |
|
|
LapLink null-printer cable [can also work in turbo mode, with a PLIP
|
| 44 |
|
|
cable]. [The protocol used to pack IP packages, is a simple one
|
| 45 |
|
|
initiated by Crynwr.]
|
| 46 |
|
|
|
| 47 |
|
|
Advantages of PLIP
|
| 48 |
|
|
==================
|
| 49 |
|
|
|
| 50 |
|
|
It's cheap, it's available everywhere, and it's easy.
|
| 51 |
|
|
|
| 52 |
|
|
The PLIP cable is all that's needed to connect two Linux boxes, and it
|
| 53 |
|
|
can be build for very bucks.
|
| 54 |
|
|
|
| 55 |
|
|
Connecting two Linux boxes takes only a seconds decision and a few
|
| 56 |
|
|
minutes work, no need to search for a [supported] netcard. This might
|
| 57 |
|
|
even be especially important in the case of notebooks, where netcard
|
| 58 |
|
|
are not easily available.
|
| 59 |
|
|
|
| 60 |
|
|
Not requiring a netcard also means that apart from connecting the
|
| 61 |
|
|
cables, everything else is software configuration [which in principle
|
| 62 |
|
|
could be made very easy.]
|
| 63 |
|
|
|
| 64 |
|
|
Disadvantages of PLIP
|
| 65 |
|
|
=====================
|
| 66 |
|
|
|
| 67 |
|
|
Doesn't work over a modem, like SLIP and PPP. Limited range, 15 m.
|
| 68 |
|
|
Can only be used to connect three (?) Linux boxes. Doesn't connect to
|
| 69 |
|
|
an exiting ethernet. Isn't standard (not even de facto standard, like
|
| 70 |
|
|
SLIP).
|
| 71 |
|
|
|
| 72 |
|
|
Performance
|
| 73 |
|
|
==========
|
| 74 |
|
|
|
| 75 |
|
|
PLIP easily outperforms ethernet cards....(ups, I was dreaming, but
|
| 76 |
|
|
it *is* getting late. EOB)
|
| 77 |
|
|
|
| 78 |
|
|
|
