AVR-Chat

Does anyone use an Atmel AVR-based Zigbee (Z-Link?) module or know if 
such things _really_ exist and where I might buy them (in UK)? It seems 
the MaxStream XBee modules are popular amongst AVRFreaks - perhaps this 
means the Atmel offering isn't available?

Thanks,
Mark

I sudpect they are real, since the Z-link is really a package, a 
processor combined with an AT86RF230 Zigbee transceiver chip.  I have 5 
of the AT86RF230 chips in my possession, which I received through Atmel 
as a pre-release sample for a project that has since stalled )-:.

  It is my understanding that AT86RF230s should now be orderable through 
most Atmel distributors, which means Z-link products ought to be as well. 
  
  Have you downloaded and looked at the Z-Link protocol stack off the 
Atmel website yet? includes full source code in C.

                                     ******  N O T E  ******

    The Z-lin protocol stack implements Zigbee IEEE 802.14.5-2004.   The 
IEEE 802X committee approved 802.14.5-2006 in June of this year, and as 
I understand if, 4 vendors have achieves Zigbee Alliance Gold status, 
meaning their 802.15.4-2006 protocol stack shave passed interoperability 
testing.  You **REALLY** want to be using an 802.15.4-2006v protocol 
stack, trust me on this.  It fixed the problems with larger networks, 
permitting the full power of  the  Zigbee protocol to be used in practice.

   NOt liking to recommend other vendors when Atmel has a solution, but 
the TI Zigbee offering is 802.15.4-2006 certified, and very price 
competitive (excepting that you have to purchase an expensive ($800 or 
$2000) development kit to get a license fotr the Zigbee protocol stack, 
and a compiler which will work with the processors they implemented).


tom

Mark Nowell wrote:

>
> Does anyone use an Atmel AVR-based Zigbee (Z-Link?) module or know if
> such things _really_ exist and where I might buy them (in UK)? It seems
> the MaxStream XBee modules are popular amongst AVRFreaks - perhaps this
> means the Atmel offering isn't available?
>

Last time I looked, Atmel's 802.15.4 product did not have an
Atmel-supported ZigBee stack and one on the certification track.
That's OK if you don't plan to use ZigBee (network routing layer).

Also, many/most other module level products have an optional power
amplifier to take the 1mW that most chips have up to 60mW or so. If
you want reliable communications more than 25 ft. or so, you'll need
this. 

When using ZigBee mesh routing, it's counter-intuitive that higher
transmit power = longer battery life in most applications using
infrequent messages. This is because the hop count is lower.

I've done quite a bit with Maxstream/Digi XBeePros (Freescale chip,
Figure 8 ZigBee), and SiLabs/Helicomm, all 2.4GHz, and ZMD (900MHz No.
 America-only).

Atmel seems to hope that OEMs will use their '15.4 chips in certain
applications or design it into a module with an amplifier if needed.


--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>
> The Maxstream ones are popular IMO because they just work.  No need
to get
> a special development seat for IAR to program them, they network, they
> transfer data - In short they are inexpensive and easy to work with.  I
> love them because I don't have to re-invent the wheel to get
networking, I
> have played with the Microchip and other Zigbee development kits and
they
> are terribly "green" (as in green beer) right now.  Maxstream seems to
> have gotten their stuff to work, perhaps Ember is as good, we'll see.
> 
> DLC
> 
> > Does anyone use an Atmel AVR-based Zigbee (Z-Link?) module or know if
> > such things _really_ exist and where I might buy them (in UK)? It
seems
> > the MaxStream XBee modules are popular amongst AVRFreaks - perhaps
this

> > means the Atmel offering isn't available?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

The Maxstream ones are popular IMO because they just work.  No need to get
a special development seat for IAR to program them, they network, they
transfer data - In short they are inexpensive and easy to work with.  I
love them because I don't have to re-invent the wheel to get networking, I
have played with the Microchip and other Zigbee development kits and they
are terribly "green" (as in green beer) right now.  Maxstream seems to
have gotten their stuff to work, perhaps Ember is as good, we'll see.

DLC

> Does anyone use an Atmel AVR-based Zigbee (Z-Link?) module or know if
> such things _really_ exist and where I might buy them (in UK)? It seems
> the MaxStream XBee modules are popular amongst AVRFreaks - perhaps this
> means the Atmel offering isn't available?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Hi Steve,
I will also (hopefully) need to use zigbee if things go my way...
I am thinking of using the Xbee Pro, because of the higher power.

Is it worth buying the development kit, or it's just as easy to buy modules 
and interface to them (MAX232 or so for PC end, straight serial TTL at the 
other end)?

Also, do they really work up to 1 mile in line of sight?  I'd like to use 
them at 1Km, I am concerned about the chip antenna having lobes, and having 
to rotate... or something.

I thought nobody sells 900MHz zigbee, do they?  I'd think I should get 
longer range, and maybe less interference ... am I wrong?

Thanks,

Cat

_________________________________________________________________
Don�t waste time standing in line�try shopping online. Visit Sympatico / MSN 
Shopping today! http://shopping.sympatico.msn.ca

I did my complete development with the Xbee using TTY serial on my doodads
(connected to mega128's).   They were pretty easy to use once I figured out
how to configure them to do what I wanted.  You only need the level shifter
if you want to connect to a PC for firmware upgrades (or communications).

I don't know about the 1 mile.  You can talk with the Xbee support folks
(they are *very* phone friendly) and they will give you a white paper
detailing how they came across that number.  It involved the whip antennas
and line-of-site.  YMWV

-----Original Message-----
From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Cat C
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:49 PM
To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc

Hi Steve,
I will also (hopefully) need to use zigbee if things go my way...
I am thinking of using the Xbee Pro, because of the higher power.

Is it worth buying the development kit, or it's just as easy to buy modules 
and interface to them (MAX232 or so for PC end, straight serial TTL at the 
other end)?

Also, do they really work up to 1 mile in line of sight?  I'd like to use 
them at 1Km, I am concerned about the chip antenna having lobes, and having 
to rotate... or something.

I thought nobody sells 900MHz zigbee, do they?  I'd think I should get 
longer range, and maybe less interference ... am I wrong?

Thanks,

Cat

_________________________________________________________________
Don't waste time standing in line-try shopping online. Visit Sympatico / MSN

Shopping today! http://shopping.sympatico.msn.ca



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Cat C wrote:
> I thought nobody sells 900MHz zigbee, do they?  I'd think I should get 
> longer range, and maybe less interference ... am I wrong?
>   

 There are some commercially availabel 900 Mhz Zigbee products.

Downside #1:  900 Mhz Zigbess does *NOT* offer 250 Kbps data rate, 40 
Kbps, IIRC.

Downside #2:  NO, 900 Mhz Zigbee does not offer any more range

Downside #3:  900 Mhz Zigbee is considered an abomination by most Zigbee 
users, and the Zigbee Alliance barely evenb acknowledges its existence.

   There are *NO* apparent afvantages top choosing 900 Mhz Zigbee.

Oh, Downside #4:  900 Mhz Zigbess is only approved for use in the USA, IIUC.

tom

On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 23:03:41 -0600
 Thomas Keller <tjkeller1@alltel.net> wrote:
> Cat C wrote:
> > I thought nobody sells 900MHz zigbee, do they?  I'd
> think I should get 
> > longer range, and maybe less interference ... am I
> wrong?
> >   
> 
>  There are some commercially availabel 900 Mhz Zigbee
> products.
> 
> Downside #1:  900 Mhz Zigbess does *NOT* offer 250 Kbps
> data rate, 40 
> Kbps, IIRC.
> 
> Downside #2:  NO, 900 Mhz Zigbee does not offer any more
> range
> 
> Downside #3:  900 Mhz Zigbee is considered an abomination
> by most Zigbee 
> users, and the Zigbee Alliance barely evenb acknowledges
> its existence.
> 
>    There are *NO* apparent afvantages top choosing 900
> Mhz Zigbee.
> 
> Oh, Downside #4:  900 Mhz Zigbess is only approved for
> use in the USA, IIUC.
> 
> tom
> 

In the US, 900MHZ is shared with point-point
studio-transmitter links, with RFID, and with hams.
Studio-transmitter links are primary, hams are secondary,
not to interfere, and RFID is unlicensed frequency hopping
spread spectrum. 

Its not significantly better (in terms of range) than
420MHz. Antennas are half the size for the same gain.
Patches are ugly; if you try to make them out of circuit
board, you get, at very best, 3db of gain and you get more
than that with a dipole! You do get two-axis
directionality, however (more beam-like) but the beam width
tends to be 90-100 degrees in both axes. Some sort of a
small yagi would give you a LOT more range.

Jim

---------------------------------------------------------------
The Think Different Store
http://www.thinkdifferentstore.com/
For All Your Mac Gear
---------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for various responses to my original Zigbee question ...

Had a quick scan of the XBee Zigbee manual (as opposed to 15.4) and it 
would appear these modules don't support sleep mode for "end devices" - 
is this correct, and does it therefore mean that XBee isn't suitable for 
mesh networking with battery powered end devices?

Does one have to buy membership of the Zigbee Alliance to use these (or 
any other) modules in a commercial product? The ZA membership FAQ 
suggests strongly that this is the case:

*"Q: If my company uses a ZigBee module in my product, do I need to be a 
member?*
A: Yes."

Are all commercial XBee users coughing up $3500 to ZA?!

Mark


larry barello wrote:

> I did my complete development with the Xbee using TTY serial on my doodads
> (connected to mega128's).   They were pretty easy to use once I figured out
> how to configure them to do what I wanted.  You only need the level shifter
> if you want to connect to a PC for firmware upgrades (or communications).
>
> I don't know about the 1 mile.  You can talk with the Xbee support folks
> (they are *very* phone friendly) and they will give you a white paper
> detailing how they came across that number.  It involved the whip antennas
> and line-of-site.  YMWV
>
>
>
>

I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless you want some
other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section of the XBee
manual:

"Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power consumption
when not in use. In
order to enter Sleep Mode, one of the following conditions must be met (in
addition to the module
having a non-zero SM parameter value):
• Sleep_RQ (pin 9) is asserted.
• The module is idle (no data transmission or reception) for the amount of
time defined by the
ST (Time before Sleep) parameter. [NOTE: ST is only active when SM = 4-5.]
The SM command is central to setting Sleep Mode configurations. By
default, Sleep Modes are disabled
(SM = 0) and the module remains in Idle/Receive Mode. When in this state,
the module is
constantly ready to respond to serial or RF activity.
Higher Voltages. Sleep Mode current consumption is highly sensitive to
voltage. Voltages above
3.0V will cause much higher current consumption.
Pin/Host-controlled Sleep Modes
The transient current when waking from pin sleep (SM = 1 or 2) does not
exceed the idle current
of the module. The current ramps up exponentially to its idle current.
Pin Hibernate (SM = 1)
• Pin/Host-controlled
• Typical power-down current: < 10 &#956;A (@3.0 VCC)
• Wake-up time: 13.2 msec
Pin Hibernate Mode minimizes quiescent power (power consumed when in a
state of rest or inactivity).
This mode is voltage level-activated; when Sleep_RQ is asserted, the
module will finish any
transmit, receive or association activities, enter Idle Mode and then
enter a state of sleep. The
module will not respond to either serial or RF activity while in pin sleep.
To wake a sleeping module operating in Pin Hibernate Mode, de-assert
Sleep_RQ (pin 9). The
module will wake when Sleep_RQ is de-asserted and is ready to transmit or
receive when the CTS
line is low. When waking the module, the pin must be de-asserted at least
two 'byte times' after
CTS goes low. This assures that there is time for the data to enter the DI
buffer."

  Blah, that didn't format out too well...  Anyway, the XBee networks are
designed to run in low power sleep mode for sensor arrays, so sleep and
indirect transmission queueing are indeed supported at the coordinator.

DLC

> Thanks for various responses to my original Zigbee question ...
>
> Had a quick scan of the XBee Zigbee manual (as opposed to 15.4) and it
> would appear these modules don't support sleep mode for "end devices" -
> is this correct, and does it therefore mean that XBee isn't suitable for
> mesh networking with battery powered end devices?
>
> Does one have to buy membership of the Zigbee Alliance to use these (or
> any other) modules in a commercial product? The ZA membership FAQ
> suggests strongly that this is the case:
>
> *"Q: If my company uses a ZigBee module in my product, do I need to be a
> member?*
> A: Yes."
>
> Are all commercial XBee users coughing up $3500 to ZA?!
>
> Mark
>
>
> larry barello wrote:
>> I did my complete development with the Xbee using TTY serial on my
>> doodads
>> (connected to mega128's).   They were pretty easy to use once I figured
>> out
>> how to configure them to do what I wanted.  You only need the level
>> shifter
>> if you want to connect to a PC for firmware upgrades (or
>> communications).
>>
>> I don't know about the 1 mile.  You can talk with the Xbee support folks
>> (they are *very* phone friendly) and they will give you a white paper
>> detailing how they came across that number.  It involved the whip
>> antennas
>> and line-of-site.  YMWV
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Range with Maxstream - I obtained 3/4 mile (could have been more).
Simple test conditions: XBeePro module with little 2 inch whip
antenna, held out of car window, talking to their USB module @15 ft
elevation. The USB module is another XBeePro with a slightly better
antenna. Pretty much line of sight. With better antennas, you'd do
more. With XBee instead of XBeePro, the range would be much reduced.

900MHz modules. As far as I know, only ZMD is making these for
802.15.4 and ZigBee is delayed. Few people want 900MHz ZigBee because
it's legal only in No. America. It is slower speed. A new version of
802.15.4 due in a few months promises to speed up the 900MHz version
of the standard.  In the EU, these modules are often tweaked to run on
868MHz. The 902-928 band in No. America has lots of channels whereas
the EU's channels are few. 

2.4GHz 802.15.4 works worldwide with the exception of two or so don't
care countries. Of course 868/900MHz propagates better than 2.5GHz,
but not enough better to offset the fact that there are numerous 60mW
(Pout) radios for 2.4GHz and I've never seen more than 1mW for 868/900.

Antenna gain is easy to get, if you can stand the size.

Remember, use of the ZigBee network layer is optional in all these
802.15.4 modules. Without ZigBee it's like using Ethernet without IP -
you can address packets by the MAC address.

The current (about to change) ZigBee standard says that end-nodes
(network leaf) can sleep. Routers cannot sleep. This is a big issue
for the new standard.

--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>
>   I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless you want
some
> other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section of the XBee
> manual:
> 
> "Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power
consumption
> when not in use. In
> order to enter Sleep Mode, one of the following conditions must be
met (in
> addition to the module
> having a non-zero SM parameter value):
> • Sleep_RQ (pin 9) is asserted.
> • The module is idle (no data transmission or reception) for the
amount of
> time defined by the
> ST (Time before Sleep) parameter. [NOTE: ST is only active when SM =
4-5.]
> The SM command is central to setting Sleep Mode configurations. By
> default, Sleep Modes are disabled
> (SM = 0) and the module remains in Idle/Receive Mode. When in this
state,
> the module is
> constantly ready to respond to serial or RF activity.
> Higher Voltages. Sleep Mode current consumption is highly sensitive to
> voltage. Voltages above
> 3.0V will cause much higher current consumption.
> Pin/Host-controlled Sleep Modes
> The transient current when waking from pin sleep (SM = 1 or 2) does not
> exceed the idle current
> of the module. The current ramps up exponentially to its idle current.
> Pin Hibernate (SM = 1)
> • Pin/Host-controlled
> • Typical power-down current: < 10 &#956;A (@3.0 VCC)
> • Wake-up time: 13.2 msec
> Pin Hibernate Mode minimizes quiescent power (power consumed when in a
> state of rest or inactivity).
> This mode is voltage level-activated; when Sleep_RQ is asserted, the
> module will finish any
> transmit, receive or association activities, enter Idle Mode and then
> enter a state of sleep. The
> module will not respond to either serial or RF activity while in pin
sleep.
> To wake a sleeping module operating in Pin Hibernate Mode, de-assert
> Sleep_RQ (pin 9). The
> module will wake when Sleep_RQ is de-asserted and is ready to
transmit or
> receive when the CTS
> line is low. When waking the module, the pin must be de-asserted at
least
> two 'byte times' after
> CTS goes low. This assures that there is time for the data to enter
the DI
> buffer."
> 
>   Blah, that didn't format out too well...  Anyway, the XBee
networks are
> designed to run in low power sleep mode for sensor arrays, so sleep and
> indirect transmission queueing are indeed supported at the coordinator.
> 
> DLC
> 
> > Thanks for various responses to my original Zigbee question ...
> >
> > Had a quick scan of the XBee Zigbee manual (as opposed to 15.4) and it
> > would appear these modules don't support sleep mode for "end
devices" -
> > is this correct, and does it therefore mean that XBee isn't
suitable for
> > mesh networking with battery powered end devices?
> >
> > Does one have to buy membership of the Zigbee Alliance to use
these (or
> > any other) modules in a commercial product? The ZA membership FAQ
> > suggests strongly that this is the case:
> >
> > *"Q: If my company uses a ZigBee module in my product, do I need
to be a
> > member?*
> > A: Yes."
> >
> > Are all commercial XBee users coughing up $3500 to ZA?!
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > larry barello wrote:
> >> I did my complete development with the Xbee using TTY serial on my
> >> doodads
> >> (connected to mega128's).   They were pretty easy to use once I
figured
> >> out
> >> how to configure them to do what I wanted.  You only need the level
> >> shifter
> >> if you want to connect to a PC for firmware upgrades (or
> >> communications).
> >>
> >> I don't know about the 1 mile.  You can talk with the Xbee
support folks

> >> (they are *very* phone friendly) and they will give you a white paper
> >> detailing how they came across that number.  It involved the whip
> >> antennas
> >> and line-of-site.  YMWV
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc

I have the Maxstream Dev kit and a lot of modules (and some from other
vendors too).

The Maxstream dev kit gives you motherboards for the modules and these
provide RS232 or USB plug and play. If you get the mating connector
for the modules, you don't really need the motherboard, unless you
wish the convenience.

The modules are downloaded with firmware to run in the 802.15.4 mode
WITHOUT ZigBee routing, or with the ZigBee firmware. Depends on what
you want to do.

The X-CTU config tool for a PC is likely a free dowload. It's essential.

The manual is needed - likely a free download.

Carefully look at your requirements before choosing between the $19
XBee 1mW radio and the $33 XBeePro 60mW module (prices I've seen at 1
each).  With a 2dBi gain antenna, some call the 60mW (Pout) 100mW
(radiated power includes antenna gain).

You can purchase antennas that are omnidirectional on the horizontal
but directional on the vertical. They have a pattern like a doughnut.
The flatter the doughnut, the higher the gain. I have some that are
12dBi gain with 7 degree vertical beamwidth, but are omnidirectional
on the H.  These are a bit extreme; they're like 4 ft. long, even
though they're for 2.4GHz.

There are many sources for antennas on the web. In the context of
802.15.4 and ZigBee, perhaps the one used as a gateway connection
would have a large higher gain antenna and most/all of the others
would not. You'll need a radio with a suitable antenna connector and
the right connector adapters for the chosen antenna. And mind the coax
cable type and length vs. loss (attenuation) at 2.4GHz.


--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, "Cat C" <catalin_cluj@...> wrote:
>
> 
> >>>Antenna gain is easy to get, if you can stand the size.
> 
> I don't know how I can get antenna gain without making it
directional, and I 
> can't have that.
> 
> I don't care much about the vertical, but I need pretty much equal
field all 
> around it.
> 
> Cat
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Your Space. Your Friends. Your Stories. Share your world with
Windows Live 
> Spaces. http://discoverspaces.live.com/?loc=en-CA
>

yes, as said elsewhere in this thread, this is a 2mm pitch connector.
  The part number and suppliers for sockets are as I recall, in the
XBee manuals/specs. I have some but a'int givin' 'em up!

--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, "Cat C" <catalin_cluj@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you Steve,
> 
> Is the mating connector something special, or it could be made from IC 
> sockets or headers?  Just because I don't know where I would get the
mating 
> connectors...
> 
> I'm not sure I understand the FW phrase:  what comes on the module,
and what 
> would I need to load separately, and I may only get if I buy the devkit?
> 
> I know I need the high power ones...
> 
> Thanks again,
> 
> Cat
> 
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "stevech11" <stevech@...>
> Reply-To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 04:04:13 -0000
> 
> Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
> 
> I have the Maxstream Dev kit and a lot of modules (and some from other
> vendors too).
> 
> The Maxstream dev kit gives you motherboards for the modules and these
> provide RS232 or USB plug and play. If you get the mating connector
> for the modules, you don't really need the motherboard, unless you
> wish the convenience.
> 
> The modules are downloaded with firmware to run in the 802.15.4 mode
> WITHOUT ZigBee routing, or with the ZigBee firmware. Depends on what
> you want to do.
> 
> The X-CTU config tool for a PC is likely a free dowload. It's essential.
> 
> The manual is needed - likely a free download.
> 
> Carefully look at your requirements before choosing between the $19
> XBee 1mW radio and the $33 XBeePro 60mW module (prices I've seen at 1
> each).  With a 2dBi gain antenna, some call the 60mW (Pout) 100mW
> (radiated power includes antenna gain).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don't waste time standing in line—try shopping online. Visit
Sympatico / MSN 
> Shopping today! http://shopping.sympatico.msn.ca
>

Thank you Steve,

Is the mating connector something special, or it could be made from IC 
sockets or headers?  Just because I don't know where I would get the mating 
connectors...

I'm not sure I understand the FW phrase:  what comes on the module, and what 
would I need to load separately, and I may only get if I buy the devkit?

I know I need the high power ones...

Thanks again,

Cat

----Original Message Follows----

From: "stevech11" <stevech@san.rr.com>
Reply-To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 04:04:13 -0000

Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc

I have the Maxstream Dev kit and a lot of modules (and some from other
vendors too).

The Maxstream dev kit gives you motherboards for the modules and these
provide RS232 or USB plug and play. If you get the mating connector
for the modules, you don't really need the motherboard, unless you
wish the convenience.

The modules are downloaded with firmware to run in the 802.15.4 mode
WITHOUT ZigBee routing, or with the ZigBee firmware. Depends on what
you want to do.

The X-CTU config tool for a PC is likely a free dowload. It's essential.

The manual is needed - likely a free download.

Carefully look at your requirements before choosing between the $19
XBee 1mW radio and the $33 XBeePro 60mW module (prices I've seen at 1
each).  With a 2dBi gain antenna, some call the 60mW (Pout) 100mW
(radiated power includes antenna gain).





Yahoo! Groups Links



_________________________________________________________________
Don�t waste time standing in line�try shopping online. Visit Sympatico / MSN 
Shopping today! http://shopping.sympatico.msn.ca

>>>Antenna gain is easy to get, if you can stand the size.

I don't know how I can get antenna gain without making it directional, and I 
can't have that.

I don't care much about the vertical, but I need pretty much equal field all 
around it.

Cat

_________________________________________________________________
Your Space. Your Friends. Your Stories. Share your world with Windows Live 
Spaces. http://discoverspaces.live.com/?loc=en-CA

The blasted mating connector for the Maxstream XBee boards are 2mm 
pitch.  Grr.  If anyone has come up with graceful mating connectors for 
these I'd love to hear about it - Mine are all kludges.

DLC

Cat C wrote:
> Thank you Steve,
> 
> Is the mating connector something special, or it could be made from IC 
> sockets or headers?  Just because I don't know where I would get the mating 
> connectors...
> 
> I'm not sure I understand the FW phrase:  what comes on the module, and what 
> would I need to load separately, and I may only get if I buy the devkit?
> 
> I know I need the high power ones...
> 
> Thanks again,
> 
> Cat
> 
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "stevech11" <stevech@san.rr.com>
> Reply-To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 04:04:13 -0000
> 
> Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
> 
> I have the Maxstream Dev kit and a lot of modules (and some from other
> vendors too).
> 
> The Maxstream dev kit gives you motherboards for the modules and these
> provide RS232 or USB plug and play. If you get the mating connector
> for the modules, you don't really need the motherboard, unless you
> wish the convenience.
> 
> The modules are downloaded with firmware to run in the 802.15.4 mode
> WITHOUT ZigBee routing, or with the ZigBee firmware. Depends on what
> you want to do.
> 
> The X-CTU config tool for a PC is likely a free dowload. It's essential.
> 
> The manual is needed - likely a free download.
> 
> Carefully look at your requirements before choosing between the $19
> XBee 1mW radio and the $33 XBeePro 60mW module (prices I've seen at 1
> each).  With a 2dBi gain antenna, some call the 60mW (Pout) 100mW
> (radiated power includes antenna gain).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don’t waste time standing in line—try shopping online. Visit Sympatico / MSN 
> Shopping today! http://shopping.sympatico.msn.ca
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

-- 
-------------------------------------------------
Dennis Clark          TTT Enterprises
www.techtoystoday.com
-------------------------------------------------

I had a chat with MaxStream about the XBee modules (they were very 
helpful). To clarify the question of sleep mode:

Me: I was looking at the XBee/Pro manual and it seems the Zigbee modules 
don't support sleep mode?
MS: That is correct. The XBee's do not yet support a sleep mode when 
using the ZigBee firmware. If you are using the 802.15.4 firmware with 
the XBee's, sleep mode is supported in that case.
Me: Would I be right in saying that if I want mesh networking (i.e. 
Zigbee rather than 15.4) and battery powered sensor nodes, then XBee is 
not suitable?
MS: Not yet, that's correct. We expect to have a solution that will 
provide mesh networking with sleep mode for end nodes (for your battery 
powered sensor nodes in that case) very soon (in the next 30 - 60 days).

I also asked MaxStream and Zigbee Alliance about licensing and 
membership fees. The ZA response:

"If you are going to use ZigBee specification building 
commercial sensor modules around MaxStream's XBee modules then we answer is "yes" you have to be a member of the ZigBee.

You can then develop a ZigBee product with no additional license fees imposed by the ZigBee Alliance unless you want to market your product under the ZigBee name. With other words, if you don't call you product a ZigBee device, you do not have to undergo any other certification and licensing. However, we recommend that you go through a no-harm test program to ensure that other networks will not harm you and vice-versa."

MaxStream's final word on the subject:

"You asked if there was any licensing fee for use of the ZigBee XBee 
modules. There is only a licensing fee to the ZigBee Alliance if you use 
the word “ZigBee” in your marketing of your product. For more 
information about that, you will have to contact the ZigBee Alliance."


I'm not sure whether or not it's necessary to use the Zigbee 
specification to build a Zigbee sensor network around XBee modules - if 
it is then I in principle have to pay $3500 for use of the spec.

Mark



stevech11 wrote:

> Remember, use of the ZigBee network layer is optional in all these
> 802.15.4 modules. Without ZigBee it's like using Ethernet without IP -
> you can address packets by the MAC address.
>
> The current (about to change) ZigBee standard says that end-nodes
> (network leaf) can sleep. Routers cannot sleep. This is a big issue
> for the new standard.
>
> --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>   
>>   I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless you want
>>     
> some
>   
>> other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section of the XBee
>> manual:
>>
>> "Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power
>>     
>

There are many antenna designs which "flatten" the pattern in the vertical 
direction in order to give more gain in the horizontal plane.  They still 
have 360 degree coverage in the horizontal plane.  

The more you concentrate on this, the bigger they get, though.

Zack

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Cat C wrote:

> 
> >>>Antenna gain is easy to get, if you can stand the size.
> 
> I don't know how I can get antenna gain without making it directional, and I 
> can't have that.
> 
> I don't care much about the vertical, but I need pretty much equal field all 
> around it.
> 
> Cat
>

Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a custom XBee
protocol that isn't Zigbee?

In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh networking,
only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.

???
Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again.  Also,
if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and you have a
Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you only
need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you release
the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I understand
it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year, this year
may be different...

DLC

> I had a chat with MaxStream about the XBee modules (they were very
> helpful). To clarify the question of sleep mode:
>
> Me: I was looking at the XBee/Pro manual and it seems the Zigbee modules
> don't support sleep mode?
> MS: That is correct. The XBee's do not yet support a sleep mode when
> using the ZigBee firmware. If you are using the 802.15.4 firmware with
> the XBee's, sleep mode is supported in that case.
> Me: Would I be right in saying that if I want mesh networking (i.e.
> Zigbee rather than 15.4) and battery powered sensor nodes, then XBee is
> not suitable?
> MS: Not yet, that's correct. We expect to have a solution that will
> provide mesh networking with sleep mode for end nodes (for your battery
> powered sensor nodes in that case) very soon (in the next 30 - 60 days).
>
> I also asked MaxStream and Zigbee Alliance about licensing and
> membership fees. The ZA response:
>
> "If you are going to use ZigBee specification building
> commercial sensor modules around MaxStream's XBee modules then we answer
> is "yes" you have to be a member of the ZigBee.
>
> You can then develop a ZigBee product with no additional license fees
> imposed by the ZigBee Alliance unless you want to market your product
> under the ZigBee name. With other words, if you don't call you product a
> ZigBee device, you do not have to undergo any other certification and
> licensing. However, we recommend that you go through a no-harm test
> program to ensure that other networks will not harm you and vice-versa."
>
> MaxStream's final word on the subject:
>
> "You asked if there was any licensing fee for use of the ZigBee XBee
> modules. There is only a licensing fee to the ZigBee Alliance if you use
> the word “ZigBee” in your marketing of your product. For more
> information about that, you will have to contact the ZigBee Alliance."
>
>
> I'm not sure whether or not it's necessary to use the Zigbee
> specification to build a Zigbee sensor network around XBee modules - if
> it is then I in principle have to pay $3500 for use of the spec.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> stevech11 wrote:
>> Remember, use of the ZigBee network layer is optional in all these
>> 802.15.4 modules. Without ZigBee it's like using Ethernet without IP -
>> you can address packets by the MAC address.
>>
>> The current (about to change) ZigBee standard says that end-nodes
>> (network leaf) can sleep. Routers cannot sleep. This is a big issue
>> for the new standard.
>>
>> --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>>
>>>   I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless you want
>>>
>> some
>>
>>> other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section of the
>>> XBee
>>> manual:
>>>
>>> "Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

The project I worked on doesn't say "Zigbee" in the documentation.  We say
"802.15.4" radio protocol.  I just use the mac addressing in a star
configuration with the end nodes sleeping most of the time.

Mesh networking sound sexy but apparently isn't quite ready for prime
time...  Unfortunately (or fortunately) I was blinded by the hype when I
specified the Xbee modules for the project :L  

They are working out very well even though we can't use mesh-networking to
extend our reach.  It turns out that the PRO, with higher transmit power,
6db increase Rx sensitivity and whip for the hub communicates fine with
Regular modules over the required 85' (highly congested space with 802.11
and other interference).  Regular modules (with chip antennas) on both ends
only communicate reliably over 12' of separation.

Cheers!

-----Original Message-----
From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of dlc@frii.com
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:09 AM
To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc

Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a custom XBee
protocol that isn't Zigbee?

In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh networking,
only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.

???
Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again.  Also,
if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and you have a
Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you only
need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you release
the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I understand
it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year, this year
may be different...

DLC

> I had a chat with MaxStream about the XBee modules (they were very
> helpful). To clarify the question of sleep mode:
>
> Me: I was looking at the XBee/Pro manual and it seems the Zigbee modules
> don't support sleep mode?
> MS: That is correct. The XBee's do not yet support a sleep mode when
> using the ZigBee firmware. If you are using the 802.15.4 firmware with
> the XBee's, sleep mode is supported in that case.
> Me: Would I be right in saying that if I want mesh networking (i.e.
> Zigbee rather than 15.4) and battery powered sensor nodes, then XBee is
> not suitable?
> MS: Not yet, that's correct. We expect to have a solution that will
> provide mesh networking with sleep mode for end nodes (for your battery
> powered sensor nodes in that case) very soon (in the next 30 - 60 days).
>
> I also asked MaxStream and Zigbee Alliance about licensing and
> membership fees. The ZA response:
>
> "If you are going to use ZigBee specification building
> commercial sensor modules around MaxStream's XBee modules then we answer
> is "yes" you have to be a member of the ZigBee.
>
> You can then develop a ZigBee product with no additional license fees
> imposed by the ZigBee Alliance unless you want to market your product
> under the ZigBee name. With other words, if you don't call you product a
> ZigBee device, you do not have to undergo any other certification and
> licensing. However, we recommend that you go through a no-harm test
> program to ensure that other networks will not harm you and vice-versa."
>
> MaxStream's final word on the subject:
>
> "You asked if there was any licensing fee for use of the ZigBee XBee
> modules. There is only a licensing fee to the ZigBee Alliance if you use
> the word "ZigBee" in your marketing of your product. For more
> information about that, you will have to contact the ZigBee Alliance."
>
>
> I'm not sure whether or not it's necessary to use the Zigbee
> specification to build a Zigbee sensor network around XBee modules - if
> it is then I in principle have to pay $3500 for use of the spec.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> stevech11 wrote:
>> Remember, use of the ZigBee network layer is optional in all these
>> 802.15.4 modules. Without ZigBee it's like using Ethernet without IP -
>> you can address packets by the MAC address.
>>
>> The current (about to change) ZigBee standard says that end-nodes
>> (network leaf) can sleep. Routers cannot sleep. This is a big issue
>> for the new standard.
>>
>> --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>>
>>>   I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless you want
>>>
>> some
>>
>>> other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section of the
>>> XBee
>>> manual:
>>>
>>> "Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Well I'm starting to think that Larry's "isn't quite ready for prime 
time" is about the only sensible explanation for all the evasion and 
mystery I'm encountering when trying to figure out which kit to use for 
Zigbee mesh-networking. We really need mesh networking if this is going 
to work at all for us. It seems none of the module-makers wants to 
confess that they don't have a full working implementation of Zigbee yet 
but do any of them have such a thing? If TI/Chipcon is the answer then 
who makes modules which fully exploit this technology?

I apologise that this has drifted way OT but I (very naively) thought 
there might be an AVR-based answer to my question - now I'm beginning to 
wonder if I've got to wait 6 months to a year for _any_ real mesh 
networking solution.

Mark


larry barello wrote:

> The project I worked on doesn't say "Zigbee" in the documentation.  We say
> "802.15.4" radio protocol.  I just use the mac addressing in a star
> configuration with the end nodes sleeping most of the time.
>
> Mesh networking sound sexy but apparently isn't quite ready for prime
> time...  Unfortunately (or fortunately) I was blinded by the hype when I
> specified the Xbee modules for the project :L  
>
> They are working out very well even though we can't use mesh-networking to
> extend our reach.  It turns out that the PRO, with higher transmit power,
> 6db increase Rx sensitivity and whip for the hub communicates fine with
> Regular modules over the required 85' (highly congested space with 802.11
> and other interference).  Regular modules (with chip antennas) on both ends
> only communicate reliably over 12' of separation.
>
> Cheers!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of dlc@frii.com
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:09 AM
> To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
>
> Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
> indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a custom XBee
> protocol that isn't Zigbee?
>
> In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh networking,
> only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.
>
> ???
> Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again.  Also,
> if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and you have a
> Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you only
> need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you release
> the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
> alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I understand
> it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year, this year
> may be different...
>
> DLC
>

There is nothing stopping you from implementing your own "mesh" network -
but it will be a ton of work...

One of the Atmel Zigbee partners (in Russia) claims full mesh networking.
They base their module off of a m128 + radio chip.  The numbers are *very*
good (makes the Xbee look bad) but they are only interested in volume OEM
sales (10k+) - sigh.  That might be changing as a year has passed...

Maxstream says they are working on full Zigbee compliance & mesh networking.
It might be close.  But I am done with my original project so I don't really
care until funding pops up for a "version 2".  By then I think mesh
networking will be more available.  

I am sure that in a year there will be a lot more options.

Cheers!

-----Original Message-----
From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Nowell
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 9:28 AM
To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc

Well I'm starting to think that Larry's "isn't quite ready for prime 
time" is about the only sensible explanation for all the evasion and 
mystery I'm encountering when trying to figure out which kit to use for 
Zigbee mesh-networking. We really need mesh networking if this is going 
to work at all for us. It seems none of the module-makers wants to 
confess that they don't have a full working implementation of Zigbee yet 
but do any of them have such a thing? If TI/Chipcon is the answer then 
who makes modules which fully exploit this technology?

I apologise that this has drifted way OT but I (very naively) thought 
there might be an AVR-based answer to my question - now I'm beginning to 
wonder if I've got to wait 6 months to a year for _any_ real mesh 
networking solution.

Mark


larry barello wrote:
> The project I worked on doesn't say "Zigbee" in the documentation.  We say
> "802.15.4" radio protocol.  I just use the mac addressing in a star
> configuration with the end nodes sleeping most of the time.
>
> Mesh networking sound sexy but apparently isn't quite ready for prime
> time...  Unfortunately (or fortunately) I was blinded by the hype when I
> specified the Xbee modules for the project :L  
>
> They are working out very well even though we can't use mesh-networking to
> extend our reach.  It turns out that the PRO, with higher transmit power,
> 6db increase Rx sensitivity and whip for the hub communicates fine with
> Regular modules over the required 85' (highly congested space with 802.11
> and other interference).  Regular modules (with chip antennas) on both
ends
> only communicate reliably over 12' of separation.
>
> Cheers!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of dlc@frii.com
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:09 AM
> To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
>
> Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
> indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a custom XBee
> protocol that isn't Zigbee?
>
> In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh networking,
> only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.
>
> ???
> Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again.  Also,
> if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and you have a
> Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you only
> need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you release
> the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
> alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I understand
> it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year, this year
> may be different...
>
> DLC
>   



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Well, according to the Zigbee Alliance, 4 vendors have qualified at the 
Gold level for interoperability and complete Zigbee implementation.  
TI/Chip conis one.   You'll have to consult with Zigbee Alliance as to 
who the other three are.

   The Zigbee Alliance has an email newsletter/announcement service they 
offer for free, sign up for it at www.zigbee.org.

Mark Nowell wrote:

>
> Well I'm starting to think that Larry's "isn't quite ready for prime
> time" is about the only sensible explanation for all the evasion and
> mystery I'm encountering when trying to figure out which kit to use for
> Zigbee mesh-networking. We really need mesh networking if this is going
> to work at all for us. It seems none of the module-makers wants to
> confess that they don't have a full working implementation of Zigbee yet
> but do any of them have such a thing? If TI/Chipcon is the answer then
> who makes modules which fully exploit this technology?
>
>

Mark Nowell wrote:
<elsnipo>

> I apologise that this has drifted way OT but I (very naively) thought 
> there might be an AVR-based answer to my question - now I'm beginning to 
> wonder if I've got to wait 6 months to a year for _any_ real mesh 
> networking solution.
> 
> Mark

This is not really OT, I am enjoying the thread on new technology :)

-- 
Regards,

Kat.
---------------------------------------------------------------
  K.A.Q. Electronics     Website: www.kaqelectronics.dyndns.org
  IM: Yahoo: PinkyDwaggy MSN: katinka@kaqelectronics.dyndns.org
  For Everything Electronics 		   Phone: 0419 923 731
---------------------------------------------------------------

be sure to keep ZigBee separate from IEEE 802.15.4 which is the
MAC/PHY spec to which the chips/modules are built. ZigBee is, so far,
downloadable firmware as an option for the network layer. Some
end-item manufacturers are using the '15.4 chips but their own network
layer. 

ZigBee is silently embedded in a few high end home theater products.
In home automation, now dominated by Z-Wave from Zensys, will see
ZigBee this year. Industrial controls seems to be split between the
use of '15.4 with a non-ZigBee MAC/PHY and a wholly new MAC/PHY (FHSS).

TI acquired Chipcon some time ago. With this came their '15.4 chips.
Figure 8 Wireless was the first serious implementation of the ZigBee
standard network/routing layer. It's now owned by TI/Chipcon.

Freescale (the Motorola spin-out) had been using Figure 8's ZigBee
stack before competitor TI acquired Chipcon and thus Figure 8. This
has not yet all sorted out. 

There are two or so other ZigBee implmementations, e.g., Ember. 

Maxstream's popular XBee / XBeePro modules use, so far, the Freescale
chips in the XBee modules. Use of ZigBee is optional. I read that
Maxstream was among the first to gain certification status with ZigBee
- this being and improved version of the F8 stack as I understand.

OEM Module (not chip) makers include...
(PC boards within dev kits are not OEM modules. I call the modules
real volume products with FCC Part 15 certification).
Some of these '15.4 module sellers support ZigBee, some do not.
Again, this list does not include the chip-only vendors. Some module
makers have have appeared of late and are not listed below.

Maxstream/Digi
Silicon Labs / Helicomm
Ember
Moteiv
Dust (not ZigBee as of now)
Renesas (is working on or has finished a ZigBee stack)
Panasonic (Digikey/mouser)
OKI (Digikey/mouser)
Jennic
Crossbow (not ZigBee as of now)
ZMD (perhaps the only 900MHz chips)

The end-user product vendors are quiet about their intentions - and
they would start with chips, not modules.


--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Keller <tjkeller1@...> wrote:
>
> Well, according to the Zigbee Alliance, 4 vendors have qualified at the 
> Gold level for interoperability and complete Zigbee implementation.  
> TI/Chip conis one.   You'll have to consult with Zigbee Alliance as to 
> who the other three are.
> 
>    The Zigbee Alliance has an email newsletter/announcement service
they 
> offer for free, sign up for it at www.zigbee.org.
> 
> Mark Nowell wrote:
> >
> > Well I'm starting to think that Larry's "isn't quite ready for prime
> > time" is about the only sensible explanation for all the evasion and
> > mystery I'm encountering when trying to figure out which kit to
use for
> > Zigbee mesh-networking. We really need mesh networking if this is
going
> > to work at all for us. It seems none of the module-makers wants to
> > confess that they don't have a full working implementation of
Zigbee yet

> > but do any of them have such a thing? If TI/Chipcon is the answer then
> > who makes modules which fully exploit this technology?
> >
> >
>

not sure why, at $19 for a module w/Zigbee you'd want to, you can roll
your own meshed network. You can start with the public domain code
from UCSB as I recall - part of the TinyOS work based on YEAH! AVRs. 
Some vendors (I won't name names) that are not in the ZigBee camp are
adapting this public domain code and calling it a product.

A big deal with the ZigBee alternatives is to avoid the alliance
membership (low dues) and speed time to market with "sleeping routers"
 which is not in ZigBee 1.0. Only sleeping end-nodes.

--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, "larry barello" <yahoo@...> wrote:

>
> There is nothing stopping you from implementing your own "mesh"
network -
> but it will be a ton of work...
> 
> One of the Atmel Zigbee partners (in Russia) claims full mesh
networking.
> They base their module off of a m128 + radio chip.  The numbers are
*very*
> good (makes the Xbee look bad) but they are only interested in
volume OEM
> sales (10k+) - sigh.  That might be changing as a year has passed...
> 
> Maxstream says they are working on full Zigbee compliance & mesh
networking.
> It might be close.  But I am done with my original project so I
don't really
> care until funding pops up for a "version 2".  By then I think mesh
> networking will be more available.  
> 
> I am sure that in a year there will be a lot more options.
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
> Of Mark Nowell
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 9:28 AM
> To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
> 
> Well I'm starting to think that Larry's "isn't quite ready for prime 
> time" is about the only sensible explanation for all the evasion and 
> mystery I'm encountering when trying to figure out which kit to use for 
> Zigbee mesh-networking. We really need mesh networking if this is going 
> to work at all for us. It seems none of the module-makers wants to 
> confess that they don't have a full working implementation of Zigbee
yet 
> but do any of them have such a thing? If TI/Chipcon is the answer then 
> who makes modules which fully exploit this technology?
> 
> I apologise that this has drifted way OT but I (very naively) thought 
> there might be an AVR-based answer to my question - now I'm
beginning to 
> wonder if I've got to wait 6 months to a year for _any_ real mesh 
> networking solution.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> larry barello wrote:
> > The project I worked on doesn't say "Zigbee" in the documentation.
 We say
> > "802.15.4" radio protocol.  I just use the mac addressing in a star
> > configuration with the end nodes sleeping most of the time.
> >
> > Mesh networking sound sexy but apparently isn't quite ready for prime
> > time...  Unfortunately (or fortunately) I was blinded by the hype
when I
> > specified the Xbee modules for the project :L  
> >
> > They are working out very well even though we can't use
mesh-networking to
> > extend our reach.  It turns out that the PRO, with higher transmit
power,
> > 6db increase Rx sensitivity and whip for the hub communicates fine
with
> > Regular modules over the required 85' (highly congested space with
802.11
> > and other interference).  Regular modules (with chip antennas) on both
> ends
> > only communicate reliably over 12' of separation.
> >
> > Cheers!
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf
> > Of dlc@...
> > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:09 AM
> > To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [AVR-Chat] Re: Zigbee modules etc, etc
> >
> > Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
> > indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a custom
XBee
> > protocol that isn't Zigbee?
> >
> > In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh
networking,
> > only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.
> >
> > ???
> > Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again.
 Also,
> > if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and
you have a
> > Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you only
> > need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you
release
> > the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
> > alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I
understand
> > it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year,
this year

> > may be different...
> >
> > DLC
> >   
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>

re below...
ZigBee 1.0 is a mesh by my definition: Nodes are configured with a
network name. At power-up, every node seeks out its neighbors. A
message from node A to node X may be relayed by zero or more nodes,
mesh-like.  ZigBee defines a "coordinator" node. This node manages
network address assignments (kind of like ARP and DHCP in ethernet).
Maxstream even has a DNS-like node-name capability (beyond ZigBee).

I've used  the XBee's and other vendors' with ZigBee mesh-like - with
4 hops. I've shut down intermediate nodes and seen the mesh reform on
the fly to reroute.  One hop = 80K bytes/sec by my measures with an
ideal signal to noise and no interference.

Most vendors today are limiting the max discovered neighbors to about
5, due to memory limitations. 

A star topology, per me, means there is no routing at all and the hop
count is 1 for every message. The route from a node to the coordinator
 or gateway can be several hops. Often, the coordinator is a bridge to
a PC and thus a kind of gateway, if the PC forwards traffic to a WAN.

The semantics are not well defined.


--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>
> Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
> indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a custom XBee
> protocol that isn't Zigbee?
> 
> In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh networking,
> only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.
> 
> ???
> Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again. 
Also,
> if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and you
have a
> Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you only
> need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you release
> the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
> alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I
understand
> it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year, this year
> may be different...
> 
> DLC
> 
> > I had a chat with MaxStream about the XBee modules (they were very
> > helpful). To clarify the question of sleep mode:
> >
> > Me: I was looking at the XBee/Pro manual and it seems the Zigbee
modules
> > don't support sleep mode?
> > MS: That is correct. The XBee's do not yet support a sleep mode when
> > using the ZigBee firmware. If you are using the 802.15.4 firmware with
> > the XBee's, sleep mode is supported in that case.
> > Me: Would I be right in saying that if I want mesh networking (i.e.
> > Zigbee rather than 15.4) and battery powered sensor nodes, then
XBee is
> > not suitable?
> > MS: Not yet, that's correct. We expect to have a solution that will
> > provide mesh networking with sleep mode for end nodes (for your
battery
> > powered sensor nodes in that case) very soon (in the next 30 - 60
days).
> >
> > I also asked MaxStream and Zigbee Alliance about licensing and
> > membership fees. The ZA response:
> >
> > "If you are going to use ZigBee specification building
> > commercial sensor modules around MaxStream's XBee modules then we
answer
> > is "yes" you have to be a member of the ZigBee.
> >
> > You can then develop a ZigBee product with no additional license fees
> > imposed by the ZigBee Alliance unless you want to market your product
> > under the ZigBee name. With other words, if you don't call you
product a
> > ZigBee device, you do not have to undergo any other certification and
> > licensing. However, we recommend that you go through a no-harm test
> > program to ensure that other networks will not harm you and
vice-versa."
> >
> > MaxStream's final word on the subject:
> >
> > "You asked if there was any licensing fee for use of the ZigBee XBee
> > modules. There is only a licensing fee to the ZigBee Alliance if
you use
> > the word "ZigBee" in your marketing of your product. For more
> > information about that, you will have to contact the ZigBee Alliance."
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure whether or not it's necessary to use the Zigbee
> > specification to build a Zigbee sensor network around XBee modules
- if
> > it is then I in principle have to pay $3500 for use of the spec.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> > stevech11 wrote:
> >> Remember, use of the ZigBee network layer is optional in all these
> >> 802.15.4 modules. Without ZigBee it's like using Ethernet without
IP -

> >> you can address packets by the MAC address.
> >>
> >> The current (about to change) ZigBee standard says that end-nodes
> >> (network leaf) can sleep. Routers cannot sleep. This is a big issue
> >> for the new standard.
> >>
> >> --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@ wrote:
> >>
> >>>   I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless you want
> >>>
> >> some
> >>
> >>> other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section of the
> >>> XBee
> >>> manual:
> >>>
> >>> "Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

According to Maxtream their XBee modules are not true mesh, they have some
beta mesh software that implements routers that aren't the coordinator as
the mesh spec says, but it is beta.  The shipping code does not support
true mesh networking...Yet.

DLC

> re below...
> ZigBee 1.0 is a mesh by my definition: Nodes are configured with a
> network name. At power-up, every node seeks out its neighbors. A
> message from node A to node X may be relayed by zero or more nodes,
> mesh-like.  ZigBee defines a "coordinator" node. This node manages
> network address assignments (kind of like ARP and DHCP in ethernet).
> Maxstream even has a DNS-like node-name capability (beyond ZigBee).
>
> I've used  the XBee's and other vendors' with ZigBee mesh-like - with
> 4 hops. I've shut down intermediate nodes and seen the mesh reform on
> the fly to reroute.  One hop = 80K bytes/sec by my measures with an
> ideal signal to noise and no interference.
>
> Most vendors today are limiting the max discovered neighbors to about
> 5, due to memory limitations.
>
> A star topology, per me, means there is no routing at all and the hop
> count is 1 for every message. The route from a node to the coordinator
>  or gateway can be several hops. Often, the coordinator is a bridge to
> a PC and thus a kind of gateway, if the PC forwards traffic to a WAN.
>
> The semantics are not well defined.
>
>
> --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>>
>> Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
>> indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a custom XBee
>> protocol that isn't Zigbee?
>>
>> In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh networking,
>> only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.
>>
>> ???
>> Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again.
> Also,
>> if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and you
> have a
>> Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you only
>> need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you release
>> the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
>> alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I
> understand
>> it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year, this year
>> may be different...
>>
>> DLC
>>
>> > I had a chat with MaxStream about the XBee modules (they were very
>> > helpful). To clarify the question of sleep mode:
>> >
>> > Me: I was looking at the XBee/Pro manual and it seems the Zigbee
> modules
>> > don't support sleep mode?
>> > MS: That is correct. The XBee's do not yet support a sleep mode when
>> > using the ZigBee firmware. If you are using the 802.15.4 firmware with
>> > the XBee's, sleep mode is supported in that case.
>> > Me: Would I be right in saying that if I want mesh networking (i.e.
>> > Zigbee rather than 15.4) and battery powered sensor nodes, then
> XBee is
>> > not suitable?
>> > MS: Not yet, that's correct. We expect to have a solution that will
>> > provide mesh networking with sleep mode for end nodes (for your
> battery
>> > powered sensor nodes in that case) very soon (in the next 30 - 60
> days).
>> >
>> > I also asked MaxStream and Zigbee Alliance about licensing and
>> > membership fees. The ZA response:
>> >
>> > "If you are going to use ZigBee specification building
>> > commercial sensor modules around MaxStream's XBee modules then we
> answer
>> > is "yes" you have to be a member of the ZigBee.
>> >
>> > You can then develop a ZigBee product with no additional license fees
>> > imposed by the ZigBee Alliance unless you want to market your product
>> > under the ZigBee name. With other words, if you don't call you
> product a
>> > ZigBee device, you do not have to undergo any other certification and
>> > licensing. However, we recommend that you go through a no-harm test
>> > program to ensure that other networks will not harm you and
> vice-versa."
>> >
>> > MaxStream's final word on the subject:
>> >
>> > "You asked if there was any licensing fee for use of the ZigBee XBee
>> > modules. There is only a licensing fee to the ZigBee Alliance if
> you use
>> > the word "ZigBee" in your marketing of your product. For more
>> > information about that, you will have to contact the ZigBee Alliance."
>> >
>> >
>> > I'm not sure whether or not it's necessary to use the Zigbee
>> > specification to build a Zigbee sensor network around XBee modules
> - if
>> > it is then I in principle have to pay $3500 for use of the spec.
>> >
>> > Mark
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > stevech11 wrote:
>> >> Remember, use of the ZigBee network layer is optional in all these
>> >> 802.15.4 modules. Without ZigBee it's like using Ethernet without
> IP -
>> >> you can address packets by the MAC address.
>> >>
>> >> The current (about to change) ZigBee standard says that end-nodes
>> >> (network leaf) can sleep. Routers cannot sleep. This is a big issue
>> >> for the new standard.
>> >>
>> >> --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@ wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>   I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless you want
>> >>>
>> >> some
>> >>
>> >>> other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section of the
>> >>> XBee
>> >>> manual:
>> >>>
>> >>> "Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

ZigBee - I am guilty of assuming that Maxstream moved out of beta with
Zigbee since it's "certified" now. I see they haven't. They have a
huge number of beta testers. So a request may well be accepted. 


--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@... wrote:
>
> According to Maxtream their XBee modules are not true mesh, they
have some
> beta mesh software that implements routers that aren't the
coordinator as
> the mesh spec says, but it is beta.  The shipping code does not support
> true mesh networking...Yet.
> 
> DLC
> 
> > re below...
> > ZigBee 1.0 is a mesh by my definition: Nodes are configured with a
> > network name. At power-up, every node seeks out its neighbors. A
> > message from node A to node X may be relayed by zero or more nodes,
> > mesh-like.  ZigBee defines a "coordinator" node. This node manages
> > network address assignments (kind of like ARP and DHCP in ethernet).
> > Maxstream even has a DNS-like node-name capability (beyond ZigBee).
> >
> > I've used  the XBee's and other vendors' with ZigBee mesh-like - with
> > 4 hops. I've shut down intermediate nodes and seen the mesh reform on
> > the fly to reroute.  One hop = 80K bytes/sec by my measures with an
> > ideal signal to noise and no interference.
> >
> > Most vendors today are limiting the max discovered neighbors to about
> > 5, due to memory limitations.
> >
> > A star topology, per me, means there is no routing at all and the hop
> > count is 1 for every message. The route from a node to the coordinator
> >  or gateway can be several hops. Often, the coordinator is a bridge to
> > a PC and thus a kind of gateway, if the PC forwards traffic to a WAN.
> >
> > The semantics are not well defined.
> >
> >
> > --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@ wrote:
> >>
> >> Now I'm confused.  The manual specifically addresses sleep mode and
> >> indirect messaging in a non-beacon network.  Is that then a
custom XBee
> >> protocol that isn't Zigbee?
> >>
> >> In my conversations with Maxstream they don't even have mesh
networking,
> >> only star networking since their Zigbee does not yet have mesh.
> >>
> >> ???
> >> Now I'll have to go back to them and talk about it all over again.
> > Also,
> >> if you are going to use "Zigbee" in your product literature and you
> > have a
> >> Zigbee compliant (and tested) module like the XBee units then you
only
> >> need to have the $1500 membership and ONLY on the year that you
release
> >> the product to the public.  You only need to be listed in the Zigbee
> >> alliance (apparently) not a full voting member.  That is how I
> > understand
> >> it from when I took classes on Zigbee, but that was last year,
this year
> >> may be different...
> >>
> >> DLC
> >>
> >> > I had a chat with MaxStream about the XBee modules (they were very
> >> > helpful). To clarify the question of sleep mode:
> >> >
> >> > Me: I was looking at the XBee/Pro manual and it seems the Zigbee
> > modules
> >> > don't support sleep mode?
> >> > MS: That is correct. The XBee's do not yet support a sleep mode
when
> >> > using the ZigBee firmware. If you are using the 802.15.4
firmware with
> >> > the XBee's, sleep mode is supported in that case.
> >> > Me: Would I be right in saying that if I want mesh networking (i.e.
> >> > Zigbee rather than 15.4) and battery powered sensor nodes, then
> > XBee is
> >> > not suitable?
> >> > MS: Not yet, that's correct. We expect to have a solution that will
> >> > provide mesh networking with sleep mode for end nodes (for your
> > battery
> >> > powered sensor nodes in that case) very soon (in the next 30 - 60
> > days).
> >> >
> >> > I also asked MaxStream and Zigbee Alliance about licensing and
> >> > membership fees. The ZA response:
> >> >
> >> > "If you are going to use ZigBee specification building
> >> > commercial sensor modules around MaxStream's XBee modules then we
> > answer
> >> > is "yes" you have to be a member of the ZigBee.
> >> >
> >> > You can then develop a ZigBee product with no additional
license fees
> >> > imposed by the ZigBee Alliance unless you want to market your
product
> >> > under the ZigBee name. With other words, if you don't call you
> > product a
> >> > ZigBee device, you do not have to undergo any other
certification and
> >> > licensing. However, we recommend that you go through a no-harm test
> >> > program to ensure that other networks will not harm you and
> > vice-versa."
> >> >
> >> > MaxStream's final word on the subject:
> >> >
> >> > "You asked if there was any licensing fee for use of the ZigBee
XBee
> >> > modules. There is only a licensing fee to the ZigBee Alliance if
> > you use
> >> > the word "ZigBee" in your marketing of your product. For more
> >> > information about that, you will have to contact the ZigBee
Alliance."
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure whether or not it's necessary to use the Zigbee
> >> > specification to build a Zigbee sensor network around XBee modules
> > - if
> >> > it is then I in principle have to pay $3500 for use of the spec.
> >> >
> >> > Mark
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > stevech11 wrote:
> >> >> Remember, use of the ZigBee network layer is optional in all these
> >> >> 802.15.4 modules. Without ZigBee it's like using Ethernet without
> > IP -
> >> >> you can address packets by the MAC address.
> >> >>
> >> >> The current (about to change) ZigBee standard says that end-nodes
> >> >> (network leaf) can sleep. Routers cannot sleep. This is a big
issue
> >> >> for the new standard.
> >> >>
> >> >> --- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, dlc@ wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>   I don't think that you read the manual correctly.  Unless
you want
> >> >>>
> >> >> some
> >> >>
> >> >>> other kind of sleep mode.  To quote from the "Sleep" section
of the

> >> >>> XBee
> >> >>> manual:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> "Sleep Modes enable the RF module to enter states of low-power
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>