Lpc2000

Mark,
All I can say is "wow".  Is this a board level product?  I don't 
have the luxury of time to support two microcontrollers and also 
write my own TCP/IP stack.  How much time did it take to write the 
stack?  Did you do it from the ground up or did you adapt someone 
else's code?
James

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Butcher" <M_J_Butcher@I...> 
wrote:
> 
> Hi Bill
> 
> I decided against the cs8900 since it is very big and 
> needs 'simulated' bus lines with the LPC210x. It is also nice to 
be 
> able connect to a 100MHz hub (not all can do 100 and 10), even if 
> 100M is not necessary for throughput.
> 
> I am using the MC9S12NE64 from Freescale - HC12 processor with 
> onboard 10/100M LAN. 8k RAM and 64k FLASH - also cheaper than the 
> cs8900 when I last compared.
> 
> I have the stack optionally running on this chip with the LPC210x 
> simply requesting services (eg. UDP or TCP port) etc. via SPI. 
> Otherwise I let the MC9S12NE64 run as simple LAN<->SPI converter 
for 
> the stack in the LPC210x.
> 
> SPI between 2 processors is a bit sensitive since there is no DMA 
> and this is a bottleneck restricting throughput to a couple of M 
> bits/s.
> 
> I prefer to let the MC9S12NE64 do the stack since the throughput 
is 
> much higher and the LPC210x doesn't need to bother with the 
details. 
> The MC9S12NE64 can also take over other jobs since it has quite a 
> few free ports, A/D converters, serial interfaces, I2C etc. As an 
> extension to an LPC210x design it is very practical since it needs 
> only SPI and an IRQ line.
> 
> A couple of questions: when you say you have external RAM and 
FLASH 
> you can't be using an LPC210x - or are you reading and writing 
> over 'simulated' bus lines? I do this for some simple peripherals 
> but it is not very fast.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mark Butcher
> 
> www.mjbc.ch
> 
> PS. I have written the stack myself to match with my Op-sys. Also 
it 
> helps get really familiar with TCP/IP and all the internal 
workings. 
> If something doesn't work properly you can't blame others for 
it...I 
> decided to make it "IPV6 prepared" after looking at some open 
source 
> versions which will need a thorough re-work to do this!
> 
> PPS The MC9S12NE64 has another advantage. By programming it to do 
> LAN<->RS232 convertion it is possible to connect a PC via RS232 
> (admittedly slow but not teh issue here) to a LAN/the INTERNET and 
> debug the stack with real data in a comfortable environment (eg. 
> Visual Studio) which allows a new service (eg. HDCP, DNS etc.) to 
be 
> programmed and debugged in a very short time - say a day or so.
> 
> PPPS I am preparing a board for LPC210x and the new Microchip 
device 
> (samples should be delivered shortly) so that I can see whether it 
> has some advantages....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Knight" <BillK@t...> wrote:
> > Mark
> >   For free stacks there is lwip (also originally by Adam 
Dunkels).
> > I have it running on an LPC w/ a cs8900.  Without the web pages
> > it takes up about 50K of flash.  I have 256K of flash and a bunch
> > of exteranl RAM so have not tried to optimize it for size.  Two
> > smaller commercial alternatives are available from CMX and
> > InterNiche.
> > 
> > BTW - what SPI based 100M LAN chip are you using??  I have heard
> > of the one from MicroChip but I thought it was only 10BaseT and
> > wasn't yet available.  There is also the W3100A from WizNET that
> > is 10/100 but it's interface is the slower (400kbps) I2C.
> > 
> > Regards
> > -Bill Knight
> > R O SoftWare &
> > http://www.theARMPatch.com
> >