[OpenTRV-dev] FAQ 11: is it safe to do without the CRC on secure frames?
dhd at exnet.com
Sat Dec 19 19:13:56 GMT 2015
Module CRC support is basically completely incompatible across different module types, so we would lock into one module type/family for ever if we used it. Also it’s just not that hard to do in software.
We will be able to make use of auto preamble with more use of packet handling with the new protocol. The packet length that we will be using is about the only portable feature but should help a lot. Patience, patience! B^>
> On 19 Dec 2015, at 19:07, Deniz Erbilgin <deniz.erbilgin at gmail.com> wrote:
> I still find it amusing that we don't use the preamble and crc that are built into the rfm23bs...
> On 19/12/15 19:01, Damon Hart-Davis wrote:
>>> On 19 Dec 2015, at 18:51, Bo Herrmannsen <bo.herrmannsen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> a spanner in the works....
>>> maybe we are using the wrong AVR? ie maybe we should consider a bigger one?
>> We have the one that we have, and it is typical of smaller devices. And we aren’t able to change horses now for the valves or for Launchpad.
>> We are likely to have to stay low-end to keep costs down for both projects.
>> But in any case the issue is more to do with a combination of common radio module behaviour and interrupt latency; an otherwise more powerful MCU could even be worse.
>> OpenTRV-dev mailing list
>> OpenTRV-dev at lists.opentrv.org.uk
> OpenTRV-dev mailing list
> OpenTRV-dev at lists.opentrv.org.uk
More information about the OpenTRV-dev