Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!news.dfncis.de!not-for-mail
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-Bernhard_Br=F6ker?= <HBBroeker@t-online.de>
Newsgroups: comp.arch.embedded
Subject: Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ]
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:19:09 +0100
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <aijofdFm7cdU1@mid.dfncis.de>
References: <86sj7iuetv.fsf@gray.siamics.net> <50c45e31$0$284$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.dfncis.de tEH/hxktWrkIlqTXhiPTjwVO98MiRXgMA0LByTJ1dvl8fdx+4iSxRiXr8bT0NPCGuTMdgmFMeQ
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TmJBg7Dj0KNu2kszUFjQk58/q7E=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
In-Reply-To: <50c45e31$0$284$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Xref: csiph.com comp.arch.embedded:10736

On 09.12.2012 10:47, Glenn wrote:

> After so many years with that "stupid vintage" serial communications
> protocol, we still do not have autonegotiation (and auto-baud-detection)
> built into the protocol definitions. Why not?

Because there really is nothing to negotiate.

> Why have nobody made a request-for-comment about that,

For starters, because I'm pretty sure there is no RFC mechanism in place 
for the body that this specification is from.  If that body still 
exists, that is.

> It is simply incredibly, that after so many decades, you manually has to
> find out, how to get it to work.

Actually no.  It's exactly because of all those decades, and the myriad 
of devices already in the field, that this specification is, for all 
practical intents and purposes, immutable.  No change you could come up 
with now would help one bit with all those devices.  And if a change 
doesn't achieve anything for the overwhelming majority of applications, 
what point could there possibly be?