Talk:Hammerhead/Protocol
From Openmoko
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Um... Pavel, maybe I'm missing something here, but I think what you're calling "received packet 00" is what I'm calling packet 10. Are you saying that the high nibble of the packet type doesn't matter? Because I can't see any particular connection between these packets and the type 00 packets that gltt sends. Likewise what you're calling packet 03 has a type byte of 23, and 0D has a type byte of 9D. (I'm pretty sure that the high nibble is important. For another example, look at packet type 0E versus 9E.) [[User:FloppusMaximus|FM]] 23:24, 6 May 2007 (CEST) | Um... Pavel, maybe I'm missing something here, but I think what you're calling "received packet 00" is what I'm calling packet 10. Are you saying that the high nibble of the packet type doesn't matter? Because I can't see any particular connection between these packets and the type 00 packets that gltt sends. Likewise what you're calling packet 03 has a type byte of 23, and 0D has a type byte of 9D. (I'm pretty sure that the high nibble is important. For another example, look at packet type 0E versus 9E.) [[User:FloppusMaximus|FM]] 23:24, 6 May 2007 (CEST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Since you never answered, I fixed the headings. I don't have much time to work on this at the moment, so that's basically all I did. Also I'm not sure what you're talking about w.r.t packet 06 (/16?) so I left that alone. If you disagree with my analysis, that's fine, and please say so. [[User:FloppusMaximus|FM]] 13:32, 17 May 2007 (CEST) |
Revision as of 13:32, 17 May 2007
Um... Pavel, maybe I'm missing something here, but I think what you're calling "received packet 00" is what I'm calling packet 10. Are you saying that the high nibble of the packet type doesn't matter? Because I can't see any particular connection between these packets and the type 00 packets that gltt sends. Likewise what you're calling packet 03 has a type byte of 23, and 0D has a type byte of 9D. (I'm pretty sure that the high nibble is important. For another example, look at packet type 0E versus 9E.) FM 23:24, 6 May 2007 (CEST)
Since you never answered, I fixed the headings. I don't have much time to work on this at the moment, so that's basically all I did. Also I'm not sure what you're talking about w.r.t packet 06 (/16?) so I left that alone. If you disagree with my analysis, that's fine, and please say so. FM 13:32, 17 May 2007 (CEST)