Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #24934
| From | Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.arch.embedded |
| Subject | Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? |
| Organization | Digital Signal Labs |
| References | (1 earlier) <87inu865j1.fsf@digitalsignallabs.com> <nqp1f9$j4f$1@dont-email.me> <nqp5kh$2q8$1@dont-email.me> <87d1kf3zvs.fsf@digitalsignallabs.com> <nqr202$vpr$1@dont-email.me> |
| Date | 2016-09-08 12:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <87oa3y2x3j.fsf@digitalsignallabs.com> (permalink) |
Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> writes: > On 8.9.16 05:10, Randy Yates wrote: > >> >> Thanks David and Dimiter. TFTP does sound like a great solution and is >> probably the way I'll go. There was a miscommunication in the >> requirements and I thought we HAD to implement a SMB/CIFS client. >> Apparently that is not the case. > > Please be warned: TFTP changes the server UDP port after the first > datagram exchange. Some firewalls are not smart enough to follow > the change, and this may create a broken transfer. If you update > the first block of the transferred file before the change, you may > end with a bricked target. I recommend saving the first block until > the second one arrives (from the changed port), and touch the local > storage only after that. > > Been there - done that. > > This does not mean that TFTP is not good for the simple file update > task. It was developed for networked booting with very limited > resources, and it is the best standard protocol for the limited > situation. IMHO, it is aeons better than a SMB/CIFS solution. Thanks for these helpful, very detailed, low-level pointers, Tauno. I am just proposing this solution at this point, not implementing it. I will definitely use the information you provided as a reference if I am tasked with the implementation. -- Randy Yates, DSP/Embedded Firmware Developer Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-09-06 12:18 -0400
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-09-06 18:13 -0400
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-09-07 01:58 +0300
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-07 14:33 +0200
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-09-07 16:44 +0300
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-09-07 22:10 -0400
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-08 08:54 +0200
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-09-08 12:10 -0400
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-09-08 09:54 +0300
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-09-08 12:08 -0400
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2016-09-08 01:08 -0700
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-09-08 11:59 -0400
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2016-09-08 10:02 -0700
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2016-09-08 13:23 -0400
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2016-09-08 14:28 -0700
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-09 09:03 +0200
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2016-09-09 01:05 -0700
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-09 12:20 +0200
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2016-09-09 04:05 -0700
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-09 14:01 +0200
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2016-09-09 10:18 -0700
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? "mjbcswitzerland" <62911@EmbeddedRelated> - 2016-10-03 06:23 -0500
Re: SMB/CIFS for uTasker/Coldfire? upsidedown@downunder.com - 2016-09-09 12:39 +0300
csiph-web