| ??? 06/04/02 23:58 Read: times |
#23906 - RE: TCP/IP... but why? |
Kunal Kandekar wrote:
"...within a limited area where simple serial communication would suffice" Don't forget, if you're devising your own "simple serial" protocol, you will have to implement both ends of the link; if you embed TCP/IP, that's all you have to do - because just about everything else already has TCP/IP built in! |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why?-Andy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why?-Andy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: TCP/IP... but why? | 01/01/70 00:00 |



