different tcp/ip/web stack under qnx

Has anybody here ever used a tcp/ip/web stack other than the native QNX
stack for a machine using QNX or NTO? I like what NTO offers in terms of
process management and POSIX compliance, but the TCP stack is HUGE compared
to what I can get from other products. Specifically, US Software’s USENET
is what I’m considering…any thoughts??

casey ballentine <cballentine@home.com> wrote:

Has anybody here ever used a tcp/ip/web stack other than the native QNX
stack for a machine using QNX or NTO? I like what NTO offers in terms of
process management and POSIX compliance, but the TCP stack is HUGE compared
to what I can get from other products. Specifically, US Software’s USENET
is what I’m considering…any thoughts??

Just wondering what “huge” means to you? What is the footprint of the
USENET stack?

chris

cdm@qnx.com > “The faster I go, the behinder I get.”

Chris McKillop – Lewis Carroll –
Embedded Software Design Engineer
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Previously, casey ballentine wrote in comp.os.qnx:

Has anybody here ever used a tcp/ip/web stack other than the native QNX
stack for a machine using QNX or NTO? I like what NTO offers in terms of
process management and POSIX compliance, but the TCP stack is HUGE compared
to what I can get from other products. Specifically, US Software’s USENET
is what I’m considering…any thoughts??

Even the “tiny” tcpip stack is huge? What are the sizes you expect?

Sam


Sam Roberts (sam@cogent.ca), Cogent Real-Time Systems (www.cogent.ca)

what d’u mean ? non-qssl’s tcpip support of tcp/ip stack ? i know at
least two. but unfortunatelly both are private products not for external use
:frowning: sorry, not too helpfull information. but i’m sure that still have to be
another public free/shareware/commercial implementations of tcp/ip stak for
qnx4/nto even maybe for new qrtp, no ? btw: qn to all…

thanks

Thanks for your attention,
Ian M. Zagorskih, Software Developer, Novosoft Ltd.
E-Mail: ianzag@pochta.net ICQ 28632525
Web: http://www.novosoft.ru

// wbr
“casey ballentine” <cballentine@home.com> wrote in message
news:etPf5.27067$P4.145022@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com

Has anybody here ever used a tcp/ip/web stack other than the native QNX
stack for a machine using QNX or NTO? I like what NTO offers in terms of
process management and POSIX compliance, but the TCP stack is HUGE
compared
to what I can get from other products. Specifically, US Software’s USENET
is what I’m considering…any thoughts??

Look, I’m not trying to be negative here. First, let me state that I think
QNX and NTO are wonderful products. However, I am working on my masters
thesis and as a student, the less $$ I have to spend the better. I can get
personal use copies of software as a student for an incredible discount,
even free, but hardware vendors don’t seem to understand the plight of the
starving student. So saving money on memory is my major motivation right
now.

Okay, now that I’ve apologised and stated my piece, can someone answer my
original question? Is there a TCP/IP stack that runs along side of QNX/NTO
that is smaller than the NTO tiny TCP stack? Or, is there an open source
TCP/IP stack that runs along side of NTO that I can try to whittle down?


casey ballentine <cballentine@home.com> wrote in message
news:etPf5.27067$P4.145022@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com

Has anybody here ever used a tcp/ip/web stack other than the native QNX
stack for a machine using QNX or NTO? I like what NTO offers in terms of
process management and POSIX compliance, but the TCP stack is HUGE
compared
to what I can get from other products. Specifically, US Software’s USENET
is what I’m considering…any thoughts??

“casey ballentine” <cballentine@home.com> wrote in message
news:nV9g5.27745$P4.149983@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com

Look, I’m not trying to be negative here. First, let me state that I
think
QNX and NTO are wonderful products. However, I am working on my masters
thesis and as a student, the less $$ I have to spend the better. I can
get
personal use copies of software as a student for an incredible discount,
even free, but hardware vendors don’t seem to understand the plight of the
starving student. So saving money on memory is my major motivation right
now.

Okay, now that I’ve apologised and stated my piece, can someone answer my
original question? Is there a TCP/IP stack that runs along side of
QNX/NTO
that is smaller than the NTO tiny TCP stack? Or, is there an open source
TCP/IP stack that runs along side of NTO that I can try to whittle down?

I don’t think you will find a TCP/IP stack that is drasticaly smaller
then NTO tiny TCP. Memory wise you are probably talking about
the price of a big Mac… IMHO you are looking at the wrong place
to save ram.

casey ballentine <> cballentine@home.com> > wrote in message
news:etPf5.27067$> P4.145022@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com> …
Has anybody here ever used a tcp/ip/web stack other than the native QNX
stack for a machine using QNX or NTO? I like what NTO offers in terms
of
process management and POSIX compliance, but the TCP stack is HUGE
compared
to what I can get from other products. Specifically, US Software’s
USENET
is what I’m considering…any thoughts??
\

Okay, now that I’ve apologised and stated my piece, can someone answer my
original question? Is there a TCP/IP stack that runs along side of
QNX/NTO
that is smaller than the NTO tiny TCP stack? Or, is there an open source
TCP/IP stack that runs along side of NTO that I can try to whittle down?

Oh and to answer your question, I don’t think there is.

I know some TCP/IP stack that are very small but you have to paid for them.
Plus you would probably have to do some work to adapted them to
NTO network interface.

How much ram are you looking to save?

  • Mario