Olin wrote:
> Ah.  You must always think of a radio link as an error-prone channel.  At
> only 10 meters and 1200 bits/second, simple circuits will work fine most 
> of
> the time.  The only way to guarantee reliability is to have the
> bi-directional communication.  The higher level protocol uses ACKs and 
> NACKs
> and retries until the data gets thru.  If you can tolerate some gaps in 
> the
> data stream, then you can just use a simple transmitter and receiver with
> packets and checksums.  The receiver tosses out any packet that isn't 
> right.
>
> What is the application?

Are you familiar with the protocol used by PSC (Parallax Servo Controller), 
and other Parallax modules? I have a PSC and (in the near future) a device 
of my own making sitting on the same bus, and communicating with the PC. 
Right now it's a wired connection, but I think it should not be too hard to 
convert it to wireless. I mean, I can simply buy an off-the-shelf product --  
even a pair of BT modules, but where's the fun in that?

Data integrity is not very important, if I lose a message here and there --  
that's OK, the host software can resend the message if necessary.

Best regards,

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist