Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Smallest IP Target Device?

Posted by Cliff on from the latest-from-Q-branch dept.

Donimo asks: "I have seen many tiny ethernet loopback jacks and keyfobs, and I'm looking for the smallest IP equivalent for my toolkit. It just needs to plug into an RJ45 ethernet port and respond to ping. If the IP address is configurable, so much the better. I have looked at small IP print servers, and I could probably knock one up from a Gumstix but these are comparatively expensive solutions. Any ideas?"

12 of 41 comments (clear)

  1. picotux by ach1000 · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.picotux.com/

    1. Re:picotux by mapinguari · · Score: 2, Informative

      You mean the technical specs page?

  2. NAND chip by k4_pacific · · Score: 3, Funny

    I once got Linux to run on a 74x00 quad-NAND chip. Maybe you should try something like that.

    --
    Unknown host pong.
    1. Re:NAND chip by ebbe11 · · Score: 3, Funny
      I once got Linux to run on a 74x00 quad-NAND chip

      Did you use the other two gates for anything?

      --

      My opinion? See above.
  3. Just a ping by mnmn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have seen PIC microchips connected to something like an RL8139AS or cs8900, PHY and jack. The pic16xxx is the simplest device that can do the ICMP/IP and have enough pins to talk to the ethernet chip. The atmel devices are alternatives, like the attiny maybe. These chips are sub-$1, but remember the ethernet chip is at LEAST $10. Under $20 devices are possible where they have dedicated IP addresses and can send/receive UDP, raw IP and simple ICMP like ping. TCP will require more complexity and ram. Linux is way too big if youre talking about the simplest devices... other RTOSes fill that niche if you intend to have full TCPIP. In that case, look at micrium ucos, ecos, freertos and other similar devices.

    Will be interesting to see if someone can use a fast 8-bit chip to act as an ethernet chip too (bitbanging ethernet). Will have to be well over 10MHz and should be able to do ARP first. In that case, sub-$5 devices are possible with chips with fewer pins, with the BOM quite possibly under $2 (jacks, chip, board, phy in qty). But these will be far less reliable.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  4. You don't really ping yourself by klossner · · Score: 4, Informative
    Pinging yourself doesn't test your hardware. When you ping your own IP address, the network stack handles the response internally. Nothing goes out on the wire.

    Having a real device with a distinct IP address lets you send and receive actual packets and so verify that the PHY and MAC layers are working.

  5. XPort by nebbian · · Score: 5, Informative

    What you're probably after is an XPort in a box with a battery. These devices use 3.3V, have a full TCP/IP stack, a web server, some flash memory, all somehow shoehorned into an RJ45 connector. Yep that's right, the thing is about the size of an RJ45 connector! If it runs at 3V you could probably run it off a 3V lithium battery, of not then use 6V with a 3.3V low power regulator.

    These retail for around $30 in bulk, with a bit of digging you should be able to get one for less than $50 I'd think...

    With a switch, battery, regulator and heatshrink around it, it will still be quite small enough to lose easily :-)

    hth,
    Ben

    --
    I am artificially intelligent.
  6. Why get something with only one purpose? by Trepalium · · Score: 2, Informative
    Something like the Fluke NetTool is far more useful. Not only can you use it for basic connectivity testing, but you can also do cable length and wiring tests. You can use it inline with a computer attached to the switch to monitor how traffic is flowing through. Far more useful than a simple pingable device. It costs about $900-$2,500 (USD, depends on which version you buy), and in my opinion, it's worth it. We use the inline version ($1,500 USD) here.

    If you don't like Fluke, there are plenty of other people in the game testing business, but I don't have any experience with their products.

    --
    I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
  7. The XPort by david.given · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ...is the smallest ethernet-capable device I know of... because it is an ethernet socket!

    XPort product page with lots of marketing spiel

    You won't run Linux on it, because it's a 16-bit 8086 clone inside with 256kB RAM and 512kB flash, but if you want something to provide a quick-and-easy ethernet interface to a piece of development hardware, it's ideal. I suspect it may be a bit expensive, though (no prices available).

    There are some other similar devices from the same manufacturer --- among them is the WiPort, which is much the same thing as the XPort but uses 802.11b...

    1. Re:The XPort by Soruk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then there's always ELKS (also known as Linux-8086).

      --
      -- Soruk
  8. Try Lantronix by mustafap · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I saw this at the Embedded systems show in the UK last month

    http://www.lantronix.com/device-networking/embedde d-device-servers/xport.html

    I haven't seen an ethernet solution smaller than this. Plenty of 'play' IP implementations, using slip, but not ethernet.

    Mike.

    --
    Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
  9. Re:XPort - Buy It by yamcha666 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here is a link to an online store selling 4 types of the XPort starting at $50

    Semi-Conductor Store