MOTM

Oops.  Well, I did say "if I understand correctly..."  ;)

Nevermind... ;)

--PBr

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	alt-mode [SMTP:alt_mode@...]
> Sent:	Friday, August 11, 2000 2:37 PM
> To:	motm@egroups.com
> Subject:	RE: [motm] MIDI sucks (get your attention?)
> 
> Paul,
> 
> You are confusing TCP/IP with Ethernet.  Ethernet is a CSMA/CD technology
> (Carrier
> Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection).  A shared Ethernet does
> allow other
> nodes to "hear" each other on the same wire but the backoff and retransmit
> mechanisms are quite fast.  You can also solve congestion problems with an
> Ethernet
> switch.  
> 
> The Internet Protocol (IP) doesn't care whether it is run on a shared
> network or a
> point-to-point network.  When you dial up to your ISP, you are running a
> point to
> point link.  If you have a cable modem you are on a shared network.  IP
> works the
> same in either case.  The Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) runs on top
> of IP and
> provides reiliability, windowing, and "sessions" or "connections".  When
> you load a
> web page, you are creating a TCP connection to the server over IP.  It is
> likely
> that your TCP/IP connection runs over a variety of shared and
> point-to-point media
> to get from your home PC to the server.  [Sorry if this is basic stuff
> unrelated to
> synths but the Internet has gotten big enough that misinformation about
> how it works
> spreads too freely and I kinda feel obligated to explain this stuff when
> it gets
> twisted.]
> 
> Additionally, the configuration problems can be fairly easily solved.  You
> don't
> need to worry about the Ethernet MAC addresses, they are resolved with the
> Address
> Resolution Protocol (ARP) that is fairly simple.  When it comes to
> assigning IP
> addresses to devices, that can be a bit more complicated but it can be
> automated
> with DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol).  [You think synths had
> acronym
> overload, just get into a room with a bunch of networking geeks and you'll
> get TLA'd
> to death ;)]
> 
> Besides, a toaster controller for my MOTM might have some interesting
> creative
> possibilities...when the bagel is done, the EG fires and the 700 switches
> the 320
> LFO shape... ;^}
> 
> Eric
> 
> --- "Brousseau, Paul E (Paul)" <noise@...> wrote:
> > What I don't understand is why you'd *want* to make MIDI act like
> TCP/IP...
> > 
> > TCP/IP messages are, if I understand / recall correctly, broadcast to
> all
> > machines on a network.  You send a packet with a target address, that
> > message gets sent to *every* other machine connected to the net, and
> *each*
> > machine must figure out whether it cares about the message.  And if
> there's
> > a collision-- throw your hands up and try again after a random delay has
> > passed.  And every machine on your network having a unique ID (which is
> > handled by the network card at present)... 
> > 
> > I can just see it!  You get your brand new Korglandsoniq Groteous2000,
> and
> > you want to have it control that old Memorymoof machine in the corner...
> but
> > damnit!  What what the 'moofs ID again?  {285a-829b-dc9a}?  Or was it
> > {82b9-285b-dc9a}?  (And you thought setup was a hassle NOW!)
> > 
> > MIDI is point-to-point.  No collisions.  No IDs.  If a messages reaches
> a
> > target, it was intended to get there.  You have a MIDI box to route
> messages
> > to targets.  Its MUCH easier to centrally configure.
> > 
> > The big problem with MIDI isn't that its not distributed like TCP/IP--
> its
> > that its *slow*.  Damned slow.  Slow enough that it uses those crappy
> serial
> > interfaces on your computer.  A faster version of MIDI is what's called
> > for-- still no collisions to worry about, and you could route to more
> > machines than possible today.  
> > 
> > Besides, I don't want my toaster talking to my Waldorf Pulse.  ;)
> > 
> > --PBr
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:	The Old Crow [SMTP:oldcrow@...]
> > > Sent:	Friday, August 11, 2000 9:31 AM
> > > To:	motm@egroups.com
> > > Subject:	Re: [motm] MIDI sucks (get your attention?)
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   Analog control woes notwithstanding, the main reason I view MIDI
> with
> > > some considerable criticism is that for a networking protocol, it
> *blows*.
> > > I never will understand why they didn't go with some Manchester scheme
> to
> > > provide collision and drop error handling.  It is not that difficult
> to
> > > implement: the Apple Desktop Bus used on Macs to this day (and nearly
> as
> > > old as MIDI) achieve it.
> > > 
> > >   These days, (starting in 1990 or so) plenty of sources of cheap MII
> > > transcevier chips to fashion ethernet connections exist: it would cost
> > > next to nothing to cram one in a keyboard and use a *real* network
> > > protocol like TCP/IP to run the show.  You don't even have to abandon
> the
> > > MIDI message structure--just encapsulate it in the IP packets.
> > > 
> > >   I hope that one day a true network physical layer like ethernet
> makes it
> > > into new instruments.  And for the millions of old instruments--an
> > > ethernet to MIDI-hardware adapter (which are cheap and easy to make,
> look
> > > at the dinky little thing from www.picoweb.net!) is no problem.
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   --Crow, dreaming of the day they put real LAN hardware into the gear
> > > 
> > > /**/
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
> http://invites.yahoo.com/
> 
> 
> 
>