On Jan 21, 6:20=A0am, Mark McDougall  wrote:
> BLuRry wrote:
> > After looking at the data sheet, I realized that there is a slim
> > chance of using Uthernet without a full IP stack and only using MAC
> > communication to transmit data since there is an on-chip 802.3 handler
> > and a packet buffer. =A0Is this even remotely feasible to explore
> > further?
>
> Of course - IP is just software implementing an arbitrary protocol. You c=
an
> replace it with anything you want.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> | =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Mark McDougall =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0| "Electrical Engineers do it
> | =A0http://members.iinet.net.au/~msmcdoug> =A0 | =A0 with less resistan=
ce!"

Right, I understand that the sky is the limit when you can do bare-
metal programming on the Uthernet side.  However, under the control of
a mammoth OS like OSX, Windows or Linux, what sort of constraints is
one likely to run in to?  I remember that the Nintendo DS implemented
some sort of proprietary MAC-based communication method, but in order
to talk to the DS from a PC you had to have a specific wireless card
and replace the driver, etc.  Is it possible to do bare-metal
programming like this without having to go as far as writing drivers
in a PC world?

-B
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32