Date: 24 Aug 2003 22:54:29 -0500 From: Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: usb to ethernet converter Message-ID: <87fzjqo0i2.fsf@kanga.honeypot.net> In-Reply-To: <3F4981D2.4050906@pacbell.net> References: <2F4F7EBD-D6A3-11D7-881B-000A959CEE6A@pursued-with.net> <3F4981D2.4050906@pacbell.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 2003-08-25T03:26:10Z, "Joseph I. Davida" <jd108@pacbell.net> writes: > If that is the case, how is it that the protocol can work over direct > connection to USB port and not over ethernet? I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "protocol", but I think you're referring to the stream of printing codes sent from the computer to the printer. > This area needs a little clarification. All we are changing is the > physical interface, but keeping the rest of the filters, which do the > printer specific conversion to bitmaps (or whatever that format is) the > same. So the only change would be in the physical connection. Not even close. A computer needs a special driver to communicate with a USB printer connected to it. Since this is commonly part of the OS, you don't usually think of it, but it's there nonetheless. The computer needs a different driver to communicate with a network adapter. In reverse, your printer has drivers to decode the incoming signal from your computer. It has no idea of how to decode the incoming signal from a network adapter. As a simple example of that lack of functionality, how would you tell your printer to set an IP address on the network adapter attached to it? Short answer: you can't. Your printer has no concept of a network stack. -- Kirk Strauser
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?87fzjqo0i2.fsf>