<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML ><HEAD ><TITLE >IrDA Protocols</TITLE ><META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="Modular DocBook HTML Stylesheet Version 1.7"><LINK REL="HOME" TITLE="Linux Infrared HOWTO" HREF="index.html"><LINK REL="UP" TITLE="Advanced Topics" HREF="infrared-howto-c-advanced-topics.html"><LINK REL="PREVIOUS" TITLE="Performance Testing" HREF="infrared-howto-s-performance-testing.html"><LINK REL="NEXT" TITLE="FAQ" HREF="infrared-howto-s-faq.html"></HEAD ><BODY CLASS="sect1" BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#000000" LINK="#0000FF" VLINK="#840084" ALINK="#0000FF" ><DIV CLASS="NAVHEADER" ><TABLE SUMMARY="Header navigation table" WIDTH="100%" BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="0" ><TR ><TH COLSPAN="3" ALIGN="center" >Linux Infrared HOWTO</TH ></TR ><TR ><TD WIDTH="10%" ALIGN="left" VALIGN="bottom" ><A HREF="infrared-howto-s-performance-testing.html" ACCESSKEY="P" >Prev</A ></TD ><TD WIDTH="80%" ALIGN="center" VALIGN="bottom" >Chapter 5. Advanced Topics</TD ><TD WIDTH="10%" ALIGN="right" VALIGN="bottom" ><A HREF="infrared-howto-s-faq.html" ACCESSKEY="N" >Next</A ></TD ></TR ></TABLE ><HR ALIGN="LEFT" WIDTH="100%"></DIV ><DIV CLASS="sect1" ><H1 CLASS="sect1" ><A NAME="infrared-howto-s-irda-protocols" ></A >5.10. IrDA Protocols</H1 ><DIV CLASS="sect2" ><H2 CLASS="sect2" ><A NAME="AEN1524" ></A >5.10.1. IrDA Stack</H2 ><P > <DIV CLASS="figure" ><A NAME="AEN1527" ></A ><P ><B >Figure 5-1. IrDA Stack</B ></P ><DIV CLASS="mediaobject" ><P ><IMG SRC="images/irda_stack.jpg"><DIV CLASS="caption" ><P > IrDA Stack. </P ></DIV ></P ></DIV ></DIV > </P ></DIV ><DIV CLASS="sect2" ><H2 CLASS="sect2" ><A NAME="AEN1536" ></A >5.10.2. Existing IrDA Protocol Implementations</H2 ><P > From Lichen Wang I have taken these remarks: </P ><P > IrLAP, IrLMP, and TinyTP are pretty stable now. But various individual implementations may still have quirks. </P ><P > IrCOMM is widely used, but Microsoft vowed to drop it and use IrSocket only. </P ><P > IrObex, IrMC, IrTran-P, etc. are showing up in various devices. The supports on PC are segmented and sometimes very poor. </P ><P > New IrDA Protocol Development AIR is pushed mainly by IBM. You get wider angle and longer distance (10M?) but may be at lower data rate. You can also time-multiplex this already slow channel. In my opinion the benefit to the user is very little. AIR hardware and software changes are costly. I think you will have to wait for a long time, if ever, to see any product using AIR. </P ><P > IrBUS is pushed mainly by Sharp. It is aimed at remote control, IR keyboard, etc., not for data communication. I think if Sharp succeed, you may see IrBUS in set-top boxes, web-tv, etc. If and when these devices reaches a critical mass, some PC may incorporate IrBUS in order to control these devices. </P ><P > VFIR is the latest. The benefit is higher data rate (16 Mbps). Unlike AIR and IrBUS, the software changes for VFIR are minimum. The changes are mainly in hardware. </P ><P > In summary, I do not think we need to wait in anticipation of new IrDA protocols. A easy to install and solid implementation of the existing IrDA protocols is the cutting edge!. </P ></DIV ></DIV ><DIV CLASS="NAVFOOTER" ><HR ALIGN="LEFT" WIDTH="100%"><TABLE SUMMARY="Footer navigation table" WIDTH="100%" BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="0" ><TR ><TD WIDTH="33%" ALIGN="left" VALIGN="top" ><A HREF="infrared-howto-s-performance-testing.html" ACCESSKEY="P" >Prev</A ></TD ><TD WIDTH="34%" ALIGN="center" VALIGN="top" ><A HREF="index.html" ACCESSKEY="H" >Home</A ></TD ><TD WIDTH="33%" ALIGN="right" VALIGN="top" ><A HREF="infrared-howto-s-faq.html" ACCESSKEY="N" >Next</A ></TD ></TR ><TR ><TD WIDTH="33%" ALIGN="left" VALIGN="top" >Performance Testing</TD ><TD WIDTH="34%" ALIGN="center" VALIGN="top" ><A HREF="infrared-howto-c-advanced-topics.html" ACCESSKEY="U" >Up</A ></TD ><TD WIDTH="33%" ALIGN="right" VALIGN="top" >FAQ</TD ></TR ></TABLE ></DIV ></BODY ></HTML >