Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #196627 > unrolled thread

USB Host-Host cables

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-13 13:40 +0200
    Re: USB Host-Host cables Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-06-13 17:00 +0200
      Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-13 22:00 +0200
        Re: USB Host-Host cables Ulf Volmer <u.volmer@u-v.de> - 2018-06-13 23:10 +0200
        Re: USB Host-Host cables Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-06-14 16:00 +0200
          Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-15 12:40 +0200
            Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-15 14:20 +0200
              Re: USB Host-Host cables Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-06-15 21:10 +0200
            Re: USB Host-Host cables Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-06-15 16:10 +0200
              Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-16 13:40 +0200
                Re: USB Host-Host cables Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-06-17 20:20 +0200
                  Re: USB Host-Host cables Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2018-06-18 00:10 +0200
                    Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-18 03:30 +0200
                      Re: USB Host-Host cables David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-06-19 02:40 +0200
                      Re: USB Host-Host cables Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2018-06-19 05:30 +0200
                        Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-19 13:50 +0200
                        Re: USB Host-Host cables rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-06-19 13:50 +0200
                          Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2018-06-19 14:10 +0200
                            Re: USB Host-Host cables rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-06-19 15:20 +0200
                              Re: USB Host-Host cables <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2018-06-19 16:50 +0200
                                Re: USB Host-Host cables rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-06-20 03:50 +0200
                          Re: USB Host-Host cables Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2018-06-19 14:50 +0200
                            Re: USB Host-Host cables rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-06-19 15:20 +0200
                            Re: USB Host-Host cables David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-06-21 04:00 +0200
                              Re: USB Host-Host cables Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-06-21 05:20 +0200
                                Re: USB Host-Host cables Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-06-21 10:40 +0200
                                  Re: USB Host-Host cables Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-06-21 17:50 +0200
                                  Re: USB Host-Host cables Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@surfnaked.ca> - 2018-06-21 17:50 +0200
                              Re: USB Host-Host cables Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2018-06-21 23:40 +0200
                            Re: USB Host-Host cables Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-21 07:30 +0200
                    Re: USB Host-Host cables Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-06-18 14:50 +0200
    A Bibliography [Re: USB Host-Host cables] Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-06-17 13:50 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#196627 — USB Host-Host cables

I have purchased a USB Host-Host cable based on the PL-25A1 chipset.
Where would discussion about using it be *ON TOPIC* ?
It is recognized by Debian Stretch.
I have found relevant bits-n-pieces in manpages and package info.
I'm retired and my avocation is learning about Linux.
I'm missing background in:
    USB interfacing
    networking (in a broad sense)
TIA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#196636

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 06:29:33AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I have purchased a USB Host-Host cable based on the PL-25A1 chipset.
> Where would discussion about using it be *ON TOPIC* ?
> It is recognized by Debian Stretch.
> I have found relevant bits-n-pieces in manpages and package info.
> I'm retired and my avocation is learning about Linux.
> I'm missing background in:
>    USB interfacing
>    networking (in a broad sense)
> TIA


The plusb driver should detect it as a network interface. It's
faster than a 100Mb/s ethernet adapter and slower than a gigabit
ethernet adapter.

Plug it in to both sides and pick an IP range. Let's call it:

A:
192.168.42.1/24

B:
192.168.42.2/24

So to find your adapter name, you say:

ip link show

and eliminate the ones you know about - lo, eth0, wlan0,
whatever - and find the one that's new. Let's pretend it's
called usbnet0.

Assign it an address:

ip address add 192.168.42.1/24 usbnet0
(and on B, use ...42.2 )

You should get a route on each side:
ip 4
....
192.168.42.1/24 dev usbnet0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.42.2
...

and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
whatever.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196644

[I'm subscribed to list]

On 06/13/2018 09:57 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 06:29:33AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>> I have purchased a USB Host-Host cable based on the PL-25A1 chipset.
>> Where would discussion about using it be *ON TOPIC* ?
>> It is recognized by Debian Stretch.
>> I have found relevant bits-n-pieces in manpages and package info.
>> I'm retired and my avocation is learning about Linux.
>> I'm missing background in:
>>     USB interfacing
>>     networking (in a broad sense)
>> TIA
> 
> 
> The plusb driver should detect it as a network interface.

I don't find "plusb" in man pages or list of Debian packages.
I did find it mentioned in [https://wiki.debian.org/DeviceDatabase/USB]
Do I need to know anything more at the moment?



> It's
> faster than a 100Mb/s ethernet adapter and slower than a gigabit
> ethernet adapter.
> 
> Plug it in to both sides and pick an IP range. Let's call it:
> 
> A:
> 192.168.42.1/24
> 
> B:
> 192.168.42.2/24
> 
> So to find your adapter name, you say:
> 
> ip link show
> 
> and eliminate the ones you know about - lo, eth0, wlan0,
> whatever - and find the one that's new. Let's pretend it's
> called usbnet0.
> 
> Assign it an address:
> 
> ip address add 192.168.42.1/24 usbnet0
> (and on B, use ...42.2 )
> 
> You should get a route on each side:
> ip 4
> ....
> 192.168.42.1/24 dev usbnet0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.42.2
> ...
> 
> and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
> whatever.
> 

I've never used either "ssh" or "scp". *THEREFORE* I believe I have a 
reading assignment <grin>. After all, that was essentially what I was 
asking for :}

Not going to have a chunk of time for this project until Thursday or 
Friday afternoon. More later.

THANK YOU

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196646

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 06/13/2018 09:57 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:

> > The plusb driver should detect it as a network interface.
> 
> I don't find "plusb" in man pages or list of Debian packages.
> I did find it mentioned in [https://wiki.debian.org/DeviceDatabase/USB]

It's a kernel module included in the debian kernel.

> Do I need to know anything more at the moment?

No. module should be loaded automatically if you plugin your usb
device.

best regards
Ulf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196674

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
> > and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
> > whatever.
> > 
> 
> I've never used either "ssh" or "scp". *THEREFORE* I believe I have a
> reading assignment <grin>. After all, that was essentially what I was asking
> for :}

I just picked them as common tools for logging in across IP
networks and moving files around. All of the Internet Protocol
is open to you, just as with any other ethernet-equivalent
interface.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196700

On 06/14/2018 08:54 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>
>>> and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
>>> whatever.
>>>
>>
>> I've never used either "ssh" or "scp". *THEREFORE* I believe I have a
>> reading assignment <grin>. After all, that was essentially what I was asking
>> for :}
> 
> I just picked them as common tools for logging in across IP
> networks and moving files around. All of the Internet Protocol
> is open to you, just as with any other ethernet-equivalent
> interface.

OK. I looked at the man pages for both. The focus on secure 
communication is, in *MY* case, is an undesired complication. Some 
preliminary web searches helped me to better describe my setup.

The two machines are about a cubit apart.
The USB Host-Host cable and related software addresses the physical 
connection.
The second machine has no physical means to access the web. Thus 
removing the need for "secure" communication.
Just reading the DuckDuckGo results page caused me to realize that at an 
application level I'll want a client-server relationship [I haven't 
addressed the issue of which should be which.]

My search string was [ +"linux" +host" +"ip network" ].
It gave many attractive links.
As a major motivation for this project is educational, can you suggest 
sources or search terms to survey:
> common tools for logging in across IP networks and moving files around.

Thank you

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196702

On 06/15/2018 05:37 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 06/14/2018 08:54 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>>
>>>> and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
>>>> whatever.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've never used either "ssh" or "scp". *THEREFORE* I believe I have a
>>> reading assignment <grin>. After all, that was essentially what I was 
>>> asking
>>> for :}
>>
>> I just picked them as common tools for logging in across IP
>> networks and moving files around. All of the Internet Protocol
>> is open to you, just as with any other ethernet-equivalent
>> interface.
> 
> OK. I looked at the man pages for both. The focus on secure 
> communication is, in *MY* case, is an undesired complication. Some 
> preliminary web searches helped me to better describe my setup.
> 
> The two machines are about a cubit apart.
> The USB Host-Host cable and related software addresses the physical 
> connection.
> The second machine has no physical means to access the web. Thus 
> removing the need for "secure" communication.
> Just reading the DuckDuckGo results page caused me to realize that at an 
> application level I'll want a client-server relationship [I haven't 
> addressed the issue of which should be which.]
> 
> My search string was [ +"linux" +host" +"ip network" ].
> It gave many attractive links.
> As a major motivation for this project is educational, can you suggest 
> sources or search terms to survey:
>> common tools for logging in across IP networks and moving files around.
> 

The above search string gave many Red Hat sites that explicitly stated 
that [though sites were introductory] the methods used were aimed at Red 
Hat systems.

I change the "linux" in the search string to "debian".
One of the hits was 
[http://www.debianadmin.com/debian-networking-for-basic-and-advanced-users.html] 
which would illustrate what I was looking for when asking for 
recommended sources.

I've only browsed the hits I've gotten.
BUT I get suggestions of questions I should be asking.
Many suggest further reading :}

Now to spend an afternoon reading.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196708

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 07:15:50AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 06/15/2018 05:37 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > On 06/14/2018 08:54 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
> > > > > whatever.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I've never used either "ssh" or "scp". *THEREFORE* I believe I have a
> > > > reading assignment <grin>. After all, that was essentially what
> > > > I was asking
> > > > for :}
> > > 
> > > I just picked them as common tools for logging in across IP
> > > networks and moving files around. All of the Internet Protocol
> > > is open to you, just as with any other ethernet-equivalent
> > > interface.
> > 
> > OK. I looked at the man pages for both. The focus on secure
> > communication is, in *MY* case, is an undesired complication. Some
> > preliminary web searches helped me to better describe my setup.
> > 
> > The two machines are about a cubit apart.
> > The USB Host-Host cable and related software addresses the physical
> > connection.
> > The second machine has no physical means to access the web. Thus
> > removing the need for "secure" communication.

You're adding that means, by way of the USB-USB host cable.

> > My search string was [ +"linux" +host" +"ip network" ].
> > It gave many attractive links.
> > As a major motivation for this project is educational, can you suggest
> > sources or search terms to survey:
> > > common tools for logging in across IP networks and moving files around.

Yes, everyone uses SSH and SCP.

You may also be interested in "file sharing" protocols such as
NFS.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196704

On Friday 15 June 2018 06:37:57 Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 06/14/2018 08:54 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>> and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
> >>> whatever.
> >>
> >> I've never used either "ssh" or "scp". *THEREFORE* I believe I have
> >> a reading assignment <grin>. After all, that was essentially what I
> >> was asking for :}
> >
> > I just picked them as common tools for logging in across IP
> > networks and moving files around. All of the Internet Protocol
> > is open to you, just as with any other ethernet-equivalent
> > interface.
>
> OK. I looked at the man pages for both. The focus on secure
> communication is, in *MY* case, is an undesired complication. Some
> preliminary web searches helped me to better describe my setup.
>
> The two machines are about a cubit apart.
> The USB Host-Host cable and related software addresses the physical
> connection.
> The second machine has no physical means to access the web. Thus
> removing the need for "secure" communication.

Are you saying this second  machine has no rj54 for a network cable?

Then that leaves a serial port, or possibly a usb to serial at the 2nd's 
location. This is a bit unusual, but between a linux or windows pc, and 
an old trs-80 color computer, has been done. The software is called 
drivewire, and it adds 14 i/o channels good for 115k kilobit speeds. 
This includes a channel dedicated for printing text, which I wrote a 
script for to pass it off to cups, a channel for general midi use, and 
which can be handed off to timidity, and 14 more channels which can be 
used as text terminals, or disk drives, including the ability to "mount" 
an  image of the coco's file system as if it was another floppy drive, 
but can be a 130 megabyte file.
  
> Just reading the DuckDuckGo results page caused me to realize that at
> an application level I'll want a client-server relationship [I haven't
> addressed the issue of which should be which.]

> My search string was [ +"linux" +host" +"ip network" ].
> It gave many attractive links.
> As a major motivation for this project is educational, can you suggest
> sources or search terms to survey:

> > common tools for logging in across IP networks and moving files
> > around.

Drivewire facilitates all that. Its GPL, written in jave so it should be 
pretty portable. But for machines other than the coco's, will need 
substitutes written for its output modules. On the coco's it runs over 
the bit banger port, so any machine with a bit banging serial port would 
be a candidate to become a drivewire client.  

> Thank you



-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196723

On 06/15/2018 09:06 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 15 June 2018 06:37:57 Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
>> On 06/14/2018 08:54 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>>>> and now you can access the other side via ssh and scp and
>>>>> whatever.
>>>>
>>>> I've never used either "ssh" or "scp". *THEREFORE* I believe I have
>>>> a reading assignment <grin>. After all, that was essentially what I
>>>> was asking for :}
>>>
>>> I just picked them as common tools for logging in across IP
>>> networks and moving files around. All of the Internet Protocol
>>> is open to you, just as with any other ethernet-equivalent
>>> interface.
>>
>> OK. I looked at the man pages for both. The focus on secure
>> communication is, in *MY* case, is an undesired complication. Some
>> preliminary web searches helped me to better describe my setup.
>>
>> The two machines are about a cubit apart.
>> The USB Host-Host cable and related software addresses the physical
>> connection.
>> The second machine has no physical means to access the web. Thus
>> removing the need for "secure" communication.
> 
> Are you saying this second  machine has no rj54 for a network cable?

<*ROFL*>
All computing objects on site physically have such a connector.
Are they connected to functional silicon?  ?? ??? ;/
IIUC there are two different types of connecting cables.
     [One is topological equivalent of null modem].
Which are present? WHO knows ;/
All computing objects have physically accessible know functional USB ports.


I did my homework.
I discovered that USB-ethernet adapters existed.
That gave me a choice between *3* failure points [either converter PLUS 
cable] and *EXACTLY ONE* failure point [a USB master - USB master cable 
assembly].

If you wish to chuckle, see thread beginning at 
[https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/05/msg01073.html].


> 
> Then that leaves a serial port, or possibly a usb to serial at the 2nd's
> location. This is a bit unusual,

<chuckle>

  but between a linux or windows pc, and
> an old trs-80 color computer, has been done. The software is called
> drivewire,

Can Linux outperform Radio Shack? <chuckle>
I am not familiar with drivewire.
So I just did a web search yielding interesting hits.
I suspect they will fill in some gaps in my background. I took my 1st 
programming course as an E.E. student in the 60's. Since then my 
background might be termed eclectic ( more accurately random ;) .


  and it adds 14 i/o channels good for 115k kilobit speeds.
> This includes a channel dedicated for printing text, which I wrote a
> script for to pass it off to cups, a channel for general midi use, and
> which can be handed off to timidity, and 14 more channels which can be
> used as text terminals, or disk drives, including the ability to "mount"
> an  image of the coco's file system as if it was another floppy drive,
> but can be a 130 megabyte file.
>    
>> Just reading the DuckDuckGo results page caused me to realize that at
>> an application level I'll want a client-server relationship [I haven't
>> addressed the issue of which should be which.]
> 
>> My search string was [ +"linux" +host" +"ip network" ].
>> It gave many attractive links.
>> As a major motivation for this project is educational, can you suggest
>> sources or search terms to survey:
> 
>>> common tools for logging in across IP networks and moving files
>>> around.
> 
> Drivewire facilitates all that. Its GPL, written in jave so it should be
> pretty portable. But for machines other than the coco's, will need
> substitutes written for its output modules. On the coco's it runs over
> the bit banger port, so any machine with a bit banging serial port would
> be a candidate to become a drivewire client.
> 
>> Thank you
> 
> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196737

On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 06:31:41AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>All computing objects on site physically have such a connector.
>Are they connected to functional silicon?  ?? ??? ;/

What else would they be connected to? It's almost as though you're 
looking for problems. (LOL?)

>IIUC there are two different types of connecting cables.
>    [One is topological equivalent of null modem].
>Which are present? WHO knows ;/

I'm pretty sure it's already been pointed out that's basically a 
historical curiosity as MDI-X is built into most gigabit ethernet 
implementations in the past 15 years. 

>All computing objects have physically accessible know functional USB ports.

Yes, and USB is designed to be a mechanism for attaching peripherals, 
not a multi-master communication bus. 

>I did my homework.
>I discovered that USB-ethernet adapters existed.
>That gave me a choice between *3* failure points [either converter 
>PLUS cable] and *EXACTLY ONE* failure point [a USB master - USB master 
>cable assembly].

That's your perspective (as someone who's stated that you have no 
experience at this). From the perspective of the people who tried to 
help you, you've chosen an obscure solution rather than a well-tested 
and well-documented solution for no apparent reason. (ROFL?) From the 
perspective of someone trying to learn something, you've chosen to learn 
an obscure special-purpose implementation rather than something that's 
fairly universal. (chuckle?)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196739

> That's your perspective (as someone who's stated that you have no experience
> at this). From the perspective of the people who tried to help you, you've
> chosen an obscure solution rather than a well-tested and well-documented
> solution for no apparent reason. (ROFL?) From the perspective of someone
> trying to learn something, you've chosen to learn an obscure special-purpose
> implementation rather than something that's fairly universal. (chuckle?)

Actually, IIUC the cable he got is basically two Ethernet-to-USB
adapters connected together via an ethernet cable, all neatly packaged
as a single physical object.  So except for the fact that he can't use
any of the ethernet-to-USB adapters for some other purpose, he did get
what "we" recommended and is universal.


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196740

On 06/17/2018 05:04 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> That's your perspective (as someone who's stated that you have no experience
>> at this). From the perspective of the people who tried to help you, you've
>> chosen an obscure solution rather than a well-tested and well-documented
>> solution for no apparent reason. (ROFL?) From the perspective of someone
>> trying to learn something, you've chosen to learn an obscure special-purpose
>> implementation rather than something that's fairly universal. (chuckle?)
> 
> Actually, IIUC the cable he got is basically two Ethernet-to-USB
> adapters connected together via an ethernet cable, all neatly packaged
> as a single physical object.  So except for the fact that he can't use
> any of the ethernet-to-USB adapters for some other purpose, he did get
> what "we" recommended and is universal.
> 

*ROFL* * 1024^gazillion ;/

I have what is essentially a "USB->Serial" - "Serial->USB" Cable.
Ethernet is *NOT* involved - though there are topological similarities.
Multiple people keep telling me that I should use THIS/THAT/OTHER 
solution inspite of *FACT* I have found them unsatisfactory!

There is a MAJOR side benefit.
As I am not using a canned solution, I am learning much about what 
happens in the background.

If THEY want canned one-size-fits-all 'solutions', move to windoze!

Get idea I'm frustrated?
I ask "How to bake a cake?"
I'm told "Go drive a Ford."


I have what is essentially a "USB->Serial" - "Serial->USB" Cable.
Ethernet is *NOT* involved - though there are topological similarities.
I find it offensive!

[I'm given a plethora of solutions to 'problems' I DON'T have ... ]
[ *NOT* solutions to problems I *DO HAVE* ! ]

In the future please answer the questions I *DO* ask, NOT what you 
wished I asked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

End of RANT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196760

On Sun 17 Jun 2018 at 20:22:22 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 06/17/2018 05:04 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >>That's your perspective (as someone who's stated that you have no experience
> >>at this). From the perspective of the people who tried to help you, you've
> >>chosen an obscure solution rather than a well-tested and well-documented
> >>solution for no apparent reason. (ROFL?) From the perspective of someone
> >>trying to learn something, you've chosen to learn an obscure special-purpose
> >>implementation rather than something that's fairly universal. (chuckle?)
> >
> >Actually, IIUC the cable he got is basically two Ethernet-to-USB
> >adapters connected together via an ethernet cable, all neatly packaged
> >as a single physical object.  So except for the fact that he can't use
> >any of the ethernet-to-USB adapters for some other purpose, he did get
> >what "we" recommended and is universal.
> >
> 
> *ROFL* * 1024^gazillion ;/
> 
> I have what is essentially a "USB->Serial" - "Serial->USB" Cable.
> Ethernet is *NOT* involved - though there are topological similarities.
> Multiple people keep telling me that I should use THIS/THAT/OTHER
> solution inspite of *FACT* I have found them unsatisfactory!
> 
> There is a MAJOR side benefit.
> As I am not using a canned solution, I am learning much about what
> happens in the background.
> 
> If THEY want canned one-size-fits-all 'solutions', move to windoze!
> 
> Get idea I'm frustrated?
> I ask "How to bake a cake?"
> I'm told "Go drive a Ford."
[snipped duplicate lines]
> I find it offensive!
> 
> [I'm given a plethora of solutions to 'problems' I DON'T have ... ]
> [ *NOT* solutions to problems I *DO HAVE* ! ]
> 
> In the future please answer the questions I *DO* ask, NOT what you
> wished I asked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> End of RANT

You asked us to read and chuckle at
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/05/msg01073.html

When I did, I read that you wanted *simple* communications between the
two computers, yet you insist on using their USB ports, which makes a
solution anthing but simple, even if you hide it by insisting on an
expensive, single-use cable: you've just bundled the complexity into
the cable hardware.

OTOH it would be far less complex to connect the computers' ethernet
ports with a length of CAT5 cable for next to no price. If the port is
broken (and it sounds as if you think it might be, but probably just
because you've never tried it) then a dongle would make sense. Either
way, communication would be conventional and simple, and you'd have a
transferrable skill just like the mid-20th century person who was
using RS232.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/06/msg00395.html

As for secure solutions, trying to avoid security will merely cut
you off from conventional networking tools where it's seen as
essential nowadays. (Try typing  man rcp  or  man rlogin.)

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196761

> I have what is essentially a "USB->Serial" - "Serial->USB" Cable.
> Ethernet is *NOT* involved - though there are topological similarities.

I don't have factual knowledge of what you have, indeed, but you said:

    I have purchased a USB Host-Host cable based on the PL-25A1 chipset.

While this probably doesn't use Ethernet internally, I believe it will
behave (seen from both machines) exactly as two USB-to-Ethernet adapters
connected via an Ethernet cable.

For example, the "cable" will typically appear as a "usb0" network
interface (as is the case for USB-to-ethernet adapters) rather than as
a /dev/ttyUSB0 serial device.

So I think your cable is much less "Serial" than you think.


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196770

On 06/18/2018 10:27 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> I have what is essentially a "USB->Serial" - "Serial->USB" Cable.
>> Ethernet is *NOT* involved - though there are topological similarities.
> 
> I don't have factual knowledge of what you have, indeed, but you said:
> 
>      I have purchased a USB Host-Host cable based on the PL-25A1 chipset.
> 
> While this probably doesn't use Ethernet internally, I believe it will
> behave (seen from both machines) exactly as two USB-to-Ethernet adapters
> connected via an Ethernet cable.

Indeed. There is appropriate software in current kernels to accomplish that.

> 
> For example, the "cable" will typically appear as a "usb0" network
> interface (as is the case for USB-to-ethernet adapters) rather than as
> a /dev/ttyUSB0 serial device.
> 
> So I think your cable is much less "Serial" than you think.

The chip involved is reportedly based on the manufacturers USB-serial chip.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196771

On Monday, June 18, 2018 11:27:55 PM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> So I think your cable is much less "Serial" than you think.

Just because I'm tired of seeing this thread (even though I make an often 
feeble attempt to ignore it), I will mention that Ethernet is serial ;-)  
(full duplex in many cases)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196772

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 19/06/18 23:47, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, June 18, 2018 11:27:55 PM Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> So I think your cable is much less "Serial" than you think.
> 
> Just because I'm tired of seeing this thread (even though I make an often 
> feeble attempt to ignore it), I will mention that Ethernet is serial ;-)  
> (full duplex in many cases)

Ah, but is it still?

Gigabit (1000base-T) uses all 4 pairs simultaneously, and also encodes
multiple bits per symbol, which I think makes it effectively parallel.

Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196775

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 08:02:11 AM Richard Hector wrote:
> On 19/06/18 23:47, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, June 18, 2018 11:27:55 PM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> So I think your cable is much less "Serial" than you think.
> > 
> > Just because I'm tired of seeing this thread (even though I make an often
> > feeble attempt to ignore it), I will mention that Ethernet is serial ;-)
> > (full duplex in many cases)
> 
> Ah, but is it still?
> 
> Gigabit (1000base-T) uses all 4 pairs simultaneously, and also encodes
> multiple bits per symbol, which I think makes it effectively parallel.

Well, I'm not familiar with gigabit Ethernet.  But even using all 4 pairs 
simultaneously means that it might be some combination of serial and parallel 
(I mean, 4 pairs isn't sufficient to carry 8 bits in parallel).

Encoding multiple bits per symbol doesn't (imho) make it parallel.  Just a 
different encoding.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196777

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:11:43AM -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 08:02:11 AM Richard Hector wrote:
> > On 19/06/18 23:47, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 18, 2018 11:27:55 PM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > >> So I think your cable is much less "Serial" than you think.
> > > 
> > > Just because I'm tired of seeing this thread (even though I make an often
> > > feeble attempt to ignore it), I will mention that Ethernet is serial ;-)
> > > (full duplex in many cases)
> > 
> > Ah, but is it still?
> > 
> > Gigabit (1000base-T) uses all 4 pairs simultaneously, and also encodes
> > multiple bits per symbol, which I think makes it effectively parallel.
> 
> Well, I'm not familiar with gigabit Ethernet.  But even using all 4 pairs 
> simultaneously means that it might be some combination of serial and parallel 
> (I mean, 4 pairs isn't sufficient to carry 8 bits in parallel).

Parallel doesn't necessarily mean 8 bit. And 100BaseT sends three voltage
levels over the differential pair, so it's a tad more than 1.5 bits per
"wire". But then, it's 4B5B (because it has to weave in the clock) so
it's a tad less. 1 gigabit uses more pairs, but I guess each one is used
serially (because of clock skew), so it's more like "a bundle of serial",
and uses a more complex modulation (PAM), so it's more bits/baud even.

I think the "classical" distinction serial/parallel breaks down a bit
here...

Cheers
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlspDD8ACgkQBcgs9XrR2ka6SQCeO+qm5efz53V2P14joV1kJiq8
2JUAn2YewcteQgmpMJyUOODGXnIpmTDj
=2xp1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web