[ax25-layer2] 7-byte address proposal
Samuel A. Falvo II sam.falvo at gmail.comWed Aug 2 21:05:55 UTC 2006
- Previous message: [ax25-layer2] 7-byte address proposal
- Next message: [ax25-layer2] 7-byte address proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 8/2/06, scott at opentrac.org <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. I would have to say because the FCS is already standardized, and indeed, it works perfectly well. Additionally, many hardware TNCs have dedicated hardware to help handle HDLC frames -- if we use different FCS algorithms, it'll break these TNCs, even in KISS mode. Finally, the HDLC specification, as I understand it as I don't have the original specs, states that the address field is variable length -- it is *only* AX.25 2.2 and earlier that says that the address field must be an integral number of 7-octet addresses. HDLC in and of itself couldn't care less -- as long as bit 0 of the last address octet is set, that's all that matters. Therefore, using a sentinel and AFI is fully compliant with the HDLC specifications, and *should* be compatible with hardware HDLC implementations as well, but not having the datasheets for those that are commonly in use (what ARE commonly in use?), I cannot be sure. The AFI approach is just a suggestion at this point. -- Samuel A. Falvo II
- Previous message: [ax25-layer2] 7-byte address proposal
- Next message: [ax25-layer2] 7-byte address proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the ax25-layer2 mailing list
