Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[ax25-layer2] 7-byte address proposal

James Wagner ka7ehk at yahoo.com
Wed Aug 2 20:15:19 UTC 2006


That would mean that you could not use existing hardware, ie, KISS
TNCs.

Jim, KA7EHK

--- scott at opentrac.org wrote:

> If you want to avoid interference with existing AX.25 traffic, why
> not use a
> different FCS polynomial?  Or simply take the one's compliment of the
> FCS
> and you can be sure that it'll never appear to be a valid frame.
> 
> Scott
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ax25-layer2-bounces at lists.tapr.org 
> > [mailto:ax25-layer2-bounces at lists.tapr.org] On Behalf Of 
> > Samuel A. Falvo II
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 11:56 AM
> > To: Discussion of Link Layer use of AX.25
> > Subject: Re: [ax25-layer2] 7-byte address proposal
> > 
> > On 8/2/06, James Wagner <ka7ehk at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Back to the question at hand: y-byte addresses.
> > >
> > > I like Samuel's idea. My big concern is about backward 
> > compatibility.
> > > How would an ax.2.2 or earlier protocol device handle the 7-byte
> > > addressed packets?
> > 
> > Since the address field would be an odd-ball size (2 bytes over the
> > normative sizes defined in the 2.2 spec) it *should* drop the frame
> as
> > being an invalid frame.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Samuel A. Falvo II
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > ax25-layer2 mailing list
> > ax25-layer2 at lists.tapr.org
> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ax25-layer2
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ax25-layer2 mailing list
> ax25-layer2 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ax25-layer2
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 




More information about the ax25-layer2 mailing list