From: gah@ugcs.caltech.edu   
      
   Barry Margolin  wrote:   
      
   (snip, I wrote)   
   >> If it has to fit in a small ROM (such as diskless booting) or in   
   >> hardware (FPGA) then UDP is much easier.   
      
   > Technically true. Although only really practical if you only make   
   > fairly limited use of the network, e.g. just for diskless booting or   
   > configuration with DHCP.  If you do anything more complex, like   
   > providing a web-based UI or terminal interface for configuring the   
   > device, you'll need TCP.   
      
   > So the boot ROM might only need UDP, but whatever it loads in will   
   > almost certainly include TCP.   
      
   In addition to booting diskless machines, I believe it is also   
   used for state machines in FPGA implementations. A hardware state   
   machine usually has to be much simpler than one implemented in   
   software. One can put together bytes in a memory buffer, and   
   then stuff them into an ethernet chip with a fairly simple   
   state machine.  It takes a lot more to implement the whole   
   state logic of TCP.   
      
   Now, it is usual to implement the rest of the protocol, ARP, ICMP,   
   and such, using a more usual processor.   
      
   This would be for some data collection applications that can   
   full up a buffer and expect to send it out fast.   
      
   -- glen   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)