[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LanceGS vs. Uther?

Subject: Re: LanceGS vs. Uther?
From: spectrumdaddy@nospam.com (Ewen)
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 08:00:19 +0000
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Organization: Zen Internet
References: <5f10da17-2b86-49d5-9782-8bd3e14edd1b@62g2000hsn.googlegroups.com> <fqbaf7$res$1@online.de>
User-agent: MacSOUP/2.8.2 (Mac OS X version 10.5.2 (PPC))
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.sys.apple2:32941

Oliver Schmidt <ol.sc@web.de> wrote:

> - It has a unique MAC address that the driver _CAN_ read from the
> hardware and use for network I/O. The Contiki driver however doesn't
> do so because of the complexity of the process.

The Uther card may not have a hard coded MAC address, but depending on
what you use to interface with it, you can create any MAC address you
like.

The Uthernet Link Layer for Marinetti, lets you change the LSB of the
MAC address, but only because we decided that was the most practical
thing to do. In fact the entire address can be changed from software by
patching the driver.

Does this make it better than the LanceGS, I am not sure, but if you can
patch the Uthernet LL, you could patch Contiki.

Ewen

References:
- LanceGS vs. Uther?
  - From: aiiadict@gmail.com
- Re: LanceGS vs. Uther?
  - From: ol.sc@web.de (Oliver Schmidt)

Prev by Date: Re: Lock 'N' Roll Disk Copy Program (similar to EDD3)
Next by Date: Re: Lock 'N' Roll Disk Copy Program (similar to EDD3)
Previous by thread: Re: LanceGS vs. Uther?
Next by thread: Apple IIGS social networking site
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread