[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP
From: |
Phil Dempster |
Subject: |
[lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP |
Date: |
Wed, 08 Jan 2003 22:02:24 -0000 |
> packets from UDP sockets. Also, the state->inbuffer
> should be changed to
> using lwIP's pbufs instead.
Funnily enough, that occured to me this morning too...
> If code size matter, things doesn't really look
> promising; James' PPP code
> compiles to nearly 13k. That is 4k more than the
> lwIP TCP!
I think long term, it would be better to port a full
version of PPP for use with lwIP (or else write a
lwPPP from scratch...) James' code is useful because
of its simplicity rather than its size - certain
important functional elements are not implemented,
such as authentication. Unfortunately, PPP always
going to be quite a large chunk of code.
That said, if added to lwIP, it would provide a useful
test platform whereby a remote target could be
connected via serial/ethernet to a host PC without OS
or other software dependencies.
Cheers,
Phil.
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
[This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]
- [lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP,
Phil Dempster <=
- [lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP, Adam Dunkels, 2003/01/08
- [lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP, Raghunandan, 2003/01/08
- [lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP, psheer, 2003/01/08
- [lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP, Eric Miniere, 2003/01/08
- [lwip-users] Re: [lwip] PPP, Phil Dempster, 2003/01/09
- [lwip-users] RE: [lwip] PPP, Ivarsson Magnus, 2003/01/09