Re: NadaNet 3.1 Released

[Jonno Downes <jonnosan@gmail.com>]

On May 28, 1:16 pm, "Michael J. Mahon" <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
> Much of this simplicity is obtained by assuming that all communicating
> machines are on the same physical network, seeing the same signals at
> the same time as all other machines.  A NadaNet router or even switch
> was never planned and not designed for.  The protocols are all real-time
> protocols and are intolerant of what we today call "network delays",
> so bridging NadaNet to an IP network is not really possible.

So I'm not saying it would be useful, but from further review of the
specs, it looks like an IP<->NadaNet bridge would be *possible* if the
device doing the bridging locked the NadaNet bus (i.e. output a
consant high signal) whenever it got a packet that needed to be
delivered to a remote network via IP, and released the bus when an
appropriate response packet has been sent back over the IP tunnel (or
after say a 500 ms timeout to allow eventual recovery from broken IP
connections).