Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Rich Grise <rich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:53:30 GMT
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:56:39 +0000, Nico Coesel wrote:
"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Nico Coesel" <nico@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:469287fd.52824567@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
That is a very valid argument. But there many reasons (wiring,
connectors, transformers, code size, etc ) why ethernet doesn't fit in
this application.
You can still use a PoE controller IC even if you don't have "real" Ethernet
anywhere... they're really just your standard switching converter ICs with a
simple "protocol" thrown on top to let the controller "handshake" with the
power provider system.
But that still seems like an overkill for the project at hand. There
is an ethernet connected device acting as a bus master. Using internet
technology also comes with security issues so SSL or a similar
encrypted tunneling technique is required.
A proprietary bus is not easy to hack or interface (lets say it takes
more than a laptop with ethereal) and thus requires less security
measures. SSL alone takes about 90kB of flash and some processing
power.
Earlier in the thread, you were talking about DTMF. Now you're all the
way to SSL? What are you trying to accomplish?
And, if you've got a 2-wire system, I'd use AFSK before I used DTMF.
Good Luck!
Rich
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: DTMF dead?
- References:
- DTMF dead?
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Vladimir Vassilevsky
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Mook Johnson
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Don Lancaster
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: DTMF dead?
- From: Nico Coesel
- DTMF dead?
- Prev by Date: Re: Wow, first lead-free victim: Microsoft Xbox 1 billion damage
- Next by Date: Re: Flexibility of hours for EEs
- Previous by thread: Re: DTMF dead?
- Next by thread: Re: DTMF dead?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading