Re: Developing PLATOTerm64, Flow Control woes.

From: smf <smf_at_null.net>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 23:23:36 +0100
Message-ID: <6a27ef83-ab28-05e5-4430-ce62f9854ca9@null.net>
On 04/07/2018 22:55, Mike Stein wrote:

> We may be talking about different scenarios; I assumed that we had 
> control over the protocols used at both ends and could configure them 
> however necessary in order to let two RS-232 devices, at least one of 
> which could *only* use XON/XOFF flow control, communicate over a LAN 
> or WAN.

I'm not sure why you would limit yourself, when sending those xon/xoff 
characters over the internet is at best irrelevant and at worse going to 
cause you problems.

You want to have as much data as possible sitting in the rs232 transmit 
buffer on the bridge, so it starts being sent as soon as you send an 
xon. Telling the other end to hold off sending, just because your RS232 
device has a full buffer is going to introduce a lot of latency.

> There are certainly fewer problems when the bridges at both ends are identical and designed to work with each other.

You're lucky if you have the luxury of getting identical hardware at 
both ends. Once you have a reasonable sized install base and a 
competitor brings out a much cheaper model just before your customer 
merges with someone, then in my experience you'll be making it work somehow.
Received on 2018-07-05 01:00:05

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.