Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: D Finnigan Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2.programmer Subject: Re: New discovery with Uthernet II/W5100 buffers Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 16:03:12 -0000 (UTC) Organization: Mac GUI Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 16:03:12 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ac9e0e4d7dd3957fb97803ee6801bab8"; logging-data="21484"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18DIM0O0E2ZUTnzVHm01qZ3" User-Agent: Mac GUI Usenet In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:a5LRbGrWVfjN33FdOVBfP7BZ8j8= Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.apple2.programmer:2179 Oliver Schmidt wrote: > > b) 4/2/1/1 - this gives Contiki/IP65/Marina and tcplib with a single > socket the maximum memory and makes socket 2 and 3 "secondary" sockets > for tcplib. > > c) 4/2/x/x - according to my current understanding of the W5100 it is > generally possible to change the memory configuration while sockets > are open as long as it doesn't change memory locations for the already > open sockets. If tests should validate my presumption tcplib could > allow the user to choose between a maximum of two sockets or three > sockets for tcplib. In the former case tcplib would configure 4/2/2/0 > and in the latter case tcplib would configure 4/2/1/1. > > What do you think? Options b and c seem reasonable to me.