In message , Rob writes: > Instead of using an Ethernet controller for projects such > as home automation, why not get hold of a simple terminal > server such as Digital Equipment Corporations - DECSERVER 200, > these units provide up to 8 modem controlled serial ports and > link back to an ethernet controller. Thanks for your comments Rob, but ... That's not a solution simply because it would cost a small fortune to put terminal servers all over one's house, or even just one per room with the RS232 providing the fanout in each room. Indeed, it makes no sense to buy an expensive interfacing unit just because the PIC can handle RS232 rates but not Ethernet ones directly. [Using surplus is OK for a handful of people, but it doesn't scale.] That's what motivated my query: OK, so we can't expect Cisco-type performance and full IP networking all done within a PIC, but it's certainly able to do frame decoding and encoding offline and to hand frames to fast but cheap external hardware for delivery at Ethernet rates. The question is, what kind of minimal external KISS hardware needs to be placed in front of the PIC to give it a fighting chance? And, what would the consequent tradeoffs in performance and capability be? Those seem quite interesting questions. Anyone can design systems around application-specific VLSI building blocks -- just follow the application notes. It seems much more creative (and lots more fun) to seek out "alternative" designs though when the requirements allow it, and the PIC is a wonderful component for those that enjoy such creativity. Remember the Cheap Video Cookbook? I'm not at all surprised to hear that Don Lancaster now likes PICs. Cheers, Rich.