[Coco] Fwd: IP packets on my coco

[Michael Brant]

Dave, while I agree with untethering and going the wifi route.  I like the
idea of using ethernet for one reason, not having to worry about using
various secured passwords that one uses with wifi.  I have both wifi and
ethernet options for my Commodore 64, each has their up side and downsides.
If ethernet can be an add-on to something like a CoCoSDC or other
controller, I say why not?

On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Dave Philipsen <dave at davebiz.com> wrote:

> I think I would agree with Brett on this.  Another point:  When you think
> about how most people will be using their CoCo 3 or CoCo3FPGA when
> connecting to the internet, most people these days use WiFi especially with
> portable or small form factor devices.  Part of the concept is to get our
> computers 'untethered' from either a host computer running Drivewire or
> from a physical  ethernet cable connecting them to the internet.  So I lean
> toward making it work without cables.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> On 6/8/2016 2:06 PM, Brett Gordon wrote:
>
>> Yup... I think redoing the firmware on the esp8266 is the better approach.
>> This would in-turn help the fpga folks out too.  OS9 doesnt do proper
>> networking, though I think it would end up being similar to Fuzix.  where
>> to draw the line for the interface is the tricky part. ;) We still have
>> plenty of work on the other side of the IP stack...and it looks like i
>> have
>> a reasonable interface (for now) with my modded lwwire server.
>>
>> Brett M Gordon
>> On Jun 8, 2016 1:56 PM, "RETRO Innovations" <go4retro at go4retro.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Or, do you want me to pursue the esp8266, and someone wants to help rewire
>>> the firmware to better support an OS like OS/9?
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Coco mailing list
>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>