Nabble - PIC - [SX]

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T17:58:00Z

Yes, it is just that the more I look into what I need for the next phase, I
can tell I will need a better chip. I don't feel like starting up something
"new" (SX/Blitz) with this old chip. If they had done something to make it
more capable over the years, that would have been good. As it is, I always
had very little respect for the archenteron of the Parallax family. A clean
break now seems best.

I fired up the old Win98 machine and did a verify with the old programmer
and the instrument so I know that works and I can write the code I need to
make the tests.

Thanks everyone,

Pete

----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc Nicholas" <geekything@...>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <piclist@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:26 PM
Subject: Re: [SX] Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

> You're aware that the SX/Blitz is only $29?
>
> -marc
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Pete Calinski <petec.100@...>
> wrote:
>
>> The C8051 looks good. It is superior to the other 8051s I looked at
>> because
>> it will clock the timer with the system clock. The others use SC/4 and
>> that
>> means my resolution is 1/4 also.
>>
>> I had seen the parallax stuff. I was hoping there was some other source
>> for
>> the old programmer software. My project has outgrown the parallax
>> architecture but I wanted to add a few changes to the current system so I
>> could gather some data before I move to another processor. I'm not
>> about
>> to buy the SXKey just for these few changes.
>>
>> Since I can't get an XP version of the programmer code I guess I'll dig
>> out
>> my old notebook computer that runs Windows 98. The screen is dead but I
>> can
>> plug a monitor into the back and do some stuff.
>>
>> Thanks for all the help everyone.
>>
>> Pete
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Spehro Pefhany" <speff@...>
>> To: <piclist@...>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 11:23 AM
>> Subject: Re: [SX] Is the Scenix Chip Alive?
>>
>>
>> > Quoting Pete Calinski <petec.100@...>:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a
>> >> project
>> >> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared.
>> >> I
>> >> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
>> >
>> > As others have said, Parallax is the owner.
>> >
>> > For a new design that requires high timer resolution you might want to
>> > look
>> > at the C8051F353R from Silabs (50MHz, they also have 100MHz) or the
>> > 40-MIPS
>> > PIC24. More CISC-y than RISC-y, I know, but probably longer design life
>> > 4U.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Spehro Pefhany
>> > --
>> > "it's the network..." "The Journey is the
>> reward"
>> > s...@... Info for manufacturers:
>> > http://www.trexon.com
>> > Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers:
>> > http://www.speff.com
>> >
>> > --
>> > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>> > View/change your membership options at
>> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>>
>> --
>> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>> View/change your membership options at
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

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

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T12:26:33Z

You're aware that the SX/Blitz is only $29?

-marc

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Pete Calinski <petec.100@...> wrote:

> The C8051 looks good. It is superior to the other 8051s I looked at
> because
> it will clock the timer with the system clock. The others use SC/4 and
> that
> means my resolution is 1/4 also.
>
> I had seen the parallax stuff. I was hoping there was some other source
> for
> the old programmer software. My project has outgrown the parallax
> architecture but I wanted to add a few changes to the current system so I
> could gather some data before I move to another processor. I'm not about
> to buy the SXKey just for these few changes.
>
> Since I can't get an XP version of the programmer code I guess I'll dig out
> my old notebook computer that runs Windows 98. The screen is dead but I
> can
> plug a monitor into the back and do some stuff.
>
> Thanks for all the help everyone.
>
> Pete
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Spehro Pefhany" <speff@...>
> To: <piclist@...>
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 11:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [SX] Is the Scenix Chip Alive?
>
>
> > Quoting Pete Calinski <petec.100@...>:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a
> >> project
> >> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
> >> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
> >
> > As others have said, Parallax is the owner.
> >
> > For a new design that requires high timer resolution you might want to
> > look
> > at the C8051F353R from Silabs (50MHz, they also have 100MHz) or the
> > 40-MIPS
> > PIC24. More CISC-y than RISC-y, I know, but probably longer design life
> > 4U.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Spehro Pefhany
> > --
> > "it's the network..." "The Journey is the
> reward"
> > s...@... Info for manufacturers:
> > http://www.trexon.com
> > Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers:
> > http://www.speff.com
> >
> > --
> > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> > View/change your membership options at
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

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

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T11:48:34Z

The C8051 looks good. It is superior to the other 8051s I looked at because
it will clock the timer with the system clock. The others use SC/4 and that
means my resolution is 1/4 also.

I had seen the parallax stuff. I was hoping there was some other source for
the old programmer software. My project has outgrown the parallax
architecture but I wanted to add a few changes to the current system so I
could gather some data before I move to another processor. I'm not about
to buy the SXKey just for these few changes.

Since I can't get an XP version of the programmer code I guess I'll dig out
my old notebook computer that runs Windows 98. The screen is dead but I can
plug a monitor into the back and do some stuff.

Thanks for all the help everyone.

Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: "Spehro Pefhany" <speff@...>
To: <piclist@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [SX] Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

> Quoting Pete Calinski <petec.100@...>:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a
>> project
>> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
>> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
>
> As others have said, Parallax is the owner.
>
> For a new design that requires high timer resolution you might want to
> look
> at the C8051F353R from Silabs (50MHz, they also have 100MHz) or the
> 40-MIPS
> PIC24. More CISC-y than RISC-y, I know, but probably longer design life
> 4U.
>
> Best regards,
> Spehro Pefhany
> --
> "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
> s...@... Info for manufacturers:
> http://www.trexon.com
> Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers:
> http://www.speff.com
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

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

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T08:54:05Z

Cygnal sure is a good silicon designer expect its price. It has much less silicon errata than microchip.
And they used to be a fabless supplier. Not sure they now manufactur in-house or not after join silicon-lab.

Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, New Bedford, MA, http://www.AuElectronics.com

----- Original Message ----
From: Spehro Pefhany <speff@...>
To: piclist@...
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 11:23:21 AM
Subject: Re: [SX] Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

Quoting Pete Calinski <petec.100@...>:

> Hello,
>
> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?

As others have said, Parallax is the owner.

For a new design that requires high timer resolution you might want to look
at the C8051F353R from Silabs (50MHz, they also have 100MHz) or the 40-MIPS
PIC24. More CISC-y than RISC-y, I know, but probably longer design life 4U.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
s...@... Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

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

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

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T08:23:21Z

Quoting Pete Calinski <petec.100@...>:

> Hello,
>
> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?

As others have said, Parallax is the owner.

For a new design that requires high timer resolution you might want to look
at the C8051F353R from Silabs (50MHz, they also have 100MHz) or the 40-MIPS
PIC24. More CISC-y than RISC-y, I know, but probably longer design life 4U.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
s...@... Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

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

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T08:20:02Z

At 08:36 AM 8/21/2008, Pete Calinski wrote:

>I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
>and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
>know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
>
>Is the chip for sale anywhere?

<www.parallax.com> Click on the big "SX" logo near the top of the page.

Parallax purchased the distribution rights for the Scenix family.

dwayne

--
Dwayne Reid <dwayner@...>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice (780) 487-6397 fax
www.trinity-electronics.com
Custom Electronics Design and Manufacturing

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

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T08:05:43Z

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Pete Calinski <petec.100@...> wrote:
> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
>
> Is the chip for sale anywhere?

Hi Pete, welcome to the list! Parallax sells the SX chips now. Their
site is http://www.parallax.com/

I hope that helps!

Josh
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools.
-Douglas Adams
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T08:02:22Z

Parallax is the only supplier/distributer for the Scenix/SX:

http://parallax.com/tabid/248/Default.aspx

Ubicom has all but expunged "SX" and "Scenix" from their website,
though to my knowledge they are still the owner or manufacturer of
that product.

You should be able to find programming info, compilers, and such there
that applies to widnows xp.

-Adam

On 8/21/08, Pete Calinski <petec.100@...> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
>
> Is the chip for sale anywhere?
>
> If not, what have people migrated to? In my application, I used the
> counter/timer to know, within 20 ns. when an interrupt occurred. I don'
> know if there is another chip out there that can do that. Does anybody?
>
> I used the Scenix programmer that ran off the parallel port with a program
> that ran under Windows 98. I just tried it under XP and it won't run. Does
> anybody have an updated version of the program? Note, every link I can find
> to the program is broken. The one on this site can get the archived circuit
> diagram but not the program.
>
> Any other advice would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks In Advance,
>
> Pete
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

--
EARTH DAY 2008
Tuesday April 22
Save Money * Save Oil * Save Lives * Save the Planet
http://www.driveslowly.org
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T07:59:37Z

Pete Calinski wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
>
>
>
Parallax owns the SX now:
http://www.parallax.com/
-
Martin

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

Re: Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T07:54:14Z

www.parallax.com.

They own the IP for the dies now...no further development will be done
AFAIK.

-marc

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Pete Calinski <petec.100@...> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
> and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
> know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?
>
> Is the chip for sale anywhere?
>
> If not, what have people migrated to? In my application, I used the
> counter/timer to know, within 20 ns. when an interrupt occurred. I don'
> know if there is another chip out there that can do that. Does anybody?
>
> I used the Scenix programmer that ran off the parallel port with a program
> that ran under Windows 98. I just tried it under XP and it won't run.
> Does
> anybody have an updated version of the program? Note, every link I can
> find
> to the program is broken. The one on this site can get the archived
> circuit
> diagram but not the program.
>
> Any other advice would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks In Advance,
>
> Pete
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

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

Is the Scenix Chip Alive?

2008-08-21T07:36:46Z

Hello,

I just found this list. I used the Scenix back in year 2000 for a project
and now I need to update it. It seems that the chip has disappeared. I
know about the Unicom transfer but now what do I do?

Is the chip for sale anywhere?

If not, what have people migrated to? In my application, I used the
counter/timer to know, within 20 ns. when an interrupt occurred. I don'
know if there is another chip out there that can do that. Does anybody?

I used the Scenix programmer that ran off the parallel port with a program
that ran under Windows 98. I just tried it under XP and it won't run. Does
anybody have an updated version of the program? Note, every link I can find
to the program is broken. The one on this site can get the archived circuit
diagram but not the program.

Any other advice would be appreciated.

Thanks In Advance,

Pete

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

SX ISD Debugger/Programmer

2008-05-16T10:59:06Z

Hello,

I have an SX-ISD In-System Debugger/Programmer made by "Advanced TransdAtA" from work which I'd like to send to a new home.
Purchase price was £323 GBP. Sell for £100, or $200, or make me an offer. Photos can be provided on request.

Includes -

Hardware:

- The SX-ISD aluminium unit
- Separate board containing the SX processor and area for prototyping/expansion
- 25 way D connector cable.

Manuals:

- "User's Manual, SX Communications Controller" 172 pages
- "Introduction to Assembly Language Programming with the SX Microcontroller" 128 pages
- SX-ISD User's guide, 83 pages
- SX-ISD instructional leaflet
- SX-ISD Quickstart notes
- Some SX datasheets/databooks

Thanks, Paul

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

Re: Bean's SX28 8x8 PWM Code and SX28 Addressable

2008-04-03T23:23:13Z

Dear piclisters,

> Michael Rigby-Jones
>
> Unless I have misunderstood, all of these would appear to suffer from
> increasing latency the further away from the host the slave is in the
> network. With a large number of slave devices this could be
> unacceptable.

You are right.
At best, those protocols have a latency of one or two character-times per slave.
Off the top of my head, here are 2 scalable protocols with even less
latency (after the initial boot-up time):
(Please tell me about other "scalable" "simple" networking protocols,
especially non-proprietary open standards).

* packet blocking: (2 wire per slave)
The host serial-out pin is connected to the first slave's serial-in
pin and a (practically zero-latency, compared with normal line delay)
noninverting line driver.
The output of the first slave's driver goes to the second slave's
serial-in pin and its driver... and so on.
Each slave can "block" its own line driver (forcing the driver output
to line idle, blocking communication to downstream slaves).
At power-on, all slaves block.
During bootup, the host gives out some address ("your address is now
A1"; "A1: now unblock") to the first slave, the first slave unblocks,
the host sends an address ("If you don't already have an address, your
address is now A2"; "A2: now unblock") to the second slave, and so on.
Eventually all the slaves are unblocked, and every slave can listen to
everything the master says.
>From then on (until the next reboot), the host sends packets addressed
to a specific slave (or to the special "Everyone" address).
When the host sends the "slave #FF, turn on your LED", every slave
simultaneously receives the message, but only slave #FF recognizes and
acts on the message.
(Is this "packet blocking" the same as what Wouter van Ooijen described?)

* daisy-chain select, common data: (3 wires per slave)
The host serial-out pin is directly connected to every slave serial-in pin.
In addition, each slave has a select-in and a select-out pin.
The host select-out pin is connected to the first slave select-in pin.
Each slave select-out pin is connected to the select-in pin of the
next slave in the chain.
At power-on, everyone holds their select-out pin high.
When the slave-select line of a slave is high, the slave "sleeps",
ignoring the serial data line.
During boot-up, the host pulls its select-out line low, and
gives out some address ("your address is now A1"; "A1: now pull your
select-out line low") to the first slave; the first slave pulls its
select-out line low, the host sends an address ("If you don't already
have an address, and your select-in line is low, your address is now
A2"; "A2: now pull your select-out line low") to the second slave, and
so on.
Eventually all the slaves have their select-in pin pulled low.
>From then on (until the next reboot), the host sends packets addressed
to a specific slave (or to the special "Everyone" address).
When the host sends the "slave #FF, turn on your LED", every slave
simultaneously receives the message, but only slave #FF recognizes and
acts on the message.

(So, how do the slaves communicate back to the host?)

p.s.:
With any daisy-chain network, it's probably good for both ends of the
daisy chain to connect back to the host.
That makes it easy for the host to check for breaks in the chain.

--
David Cary
http://carybros.com/
http://opencircuits.com/
http://wikiindex.org/Pica-wiki
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com
http://www.piclist.com/member/DAV-MP-E62a
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_Peripheral_Interface_Bus
http://www.piclist.com/techref/postbot.asp?by=thread&id=%5BSX%5D+Bean%27s+SX28+8x8+PWM+Code+and+SX28+Addressable
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

Re: Bean's SX28 8x8 PWM Code and SX28 Addressable

2008-03-25T13:14:48Z

>> Off the top of my head, here are 3 such protocols:
>> (Pick whichever one protocol is the easiest for you to implement).
>> (Please tell me about other "scalable" "simple" networking protocols,
>> especially non-proprietary open standards).
>> (snip)
> Unless I have misunderstood, all of these would appear to suffer from
> increasing latency the further away from the host the slave is in the
> network. With a large number of slave devices this could be
> unacceptable.

Here I go again: for a customer I once designed a chain-of-nodes
'network'. each node can is essence block the communication to the next
no, or let is pass. Letting it does not add a significant delay. After
startup all nodes block, and the head-end gives out the addres to the
first node, the first node unblocks, the head-end assigns the next
address, etc. Worked well up to ~100 nodes. The network was larger, the
head-ends were also chained.

Wouter

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

RE: Bean's SX28 8x8 PWM Code and SX28 Addressable

2008-03-25T02:01:55Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: piclist-bounces@... [mailto:piclist-bounces@...] On
Behalf

> Of David Cary
> Sent: 24 March 2008 05:34
> To: piclist@...
> Subject: [SX] Bean's SX28 8x8 PWM Code and SX28 Addressable
>
> > your limit per serial wire depends on how you approach it.
>
> That's certainly true.
> But I am mystified as to why so many people "hardcode" addresses into
> firmware -- that requires a custom version of the code for every chip
> on the serial network.
> I am also mystified as to why so many people "use a dip switch", which
> requires a bunch of pins to read the dip switch.
>
> Why don't these people use "scalable" networking protocols that scale
> up to an unlimited number of chips?
> Protocols that work fine with identical firmware in every chip, and
> only require a maximum of the "serial data in" pin plus 2 or so other
> pins on the master and each slave, even if there are dozens of slaves?
>
> Off the top of my head, here are 3 such protocols:
> (Pick whichever one protocol is the easiest for you to implement).
> (Please tell me about other "scalable" "simple" networking protocols,
> especially non-proprietary open standards).
>
> * daisy-chain serial SPI: (4 wires per slave; automatic baud rate
> synchronization) approach used by, among other things, JTAG scan.
>
> * decrement packet address: (2 wires per slave
>
> * daisy-chain select, common data: (3 wires per slave)

Unless I have misunderstood, all of these would appear to suffer from
increasing latency the further away from the host the slave is in the
network. With a large number of slave devices this could be
unacceptable.

Regards

Mike

=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================

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

Bean's SX28 8x8 PWM Code and SX28 Addressable

2008-03-23T22:33:42Z

> your limit per serial wire depends on how you approach it.

That's certainly true.
But I am mystified as to why so many people "hardcode" addresses into
firmware -- that requires a custom version of the code for every chip
on the serial network.
I am also mystified as to why so many people "use a dip switch", which
requires a bunch of pins to read the dip switch.

Why don't these people use "scalable" networking protocols that scale
up to an unlimited number of chips?
Protocols that work fine with identical firmware in every chip, and
only require a maximum of the "serial data in" pin plus 2 or so other
pins on the master and each slave, even if there are dozens of slaves?

Off the top of my head, here are 3 such protocols:
(Pick whichever one protocol is the easiest for you to implement).
(Please tell me about other "scalable" "simple" networking protocols,
especially non-proprietary open standards).

* daisy-chain serial SPI: (4 wires per slave; automatic baud rate
synchronization) approach used by, among other things, JTAG scan.

* decrement packet address: (2 wires per slave) each chip has a
serial-in and a serial-out pin. The host serial-out pin is connected
to the first slave serial-in pin. Each slave serial-out pin is
connected to the serial-in pin of the next slave in the chain. (The
last serial-out pin is typically connected to the serial-in pin of the
master, for loopback test purposes). When a chip receives a packet of
data on the serial-in line, it checks the destination address. If the
destination is address "00", it accepts that data as a command, turns
on lights, spins motors, activates the death ray, etc. etc. If the
destination address is any other address, the chip forwards the packet
to the next chip almost exactly. Every byte of the message is copied
the same, except for the address byte(s), which are decremented. If
the received address was "99", the chip sends "98"; if the received
address was "01", the chip sends "00". (With a bit of clever
programming, each chip does not have to wait until the entire packet
is received, but instead can start transmitting at near-wire-speed as
soon as the address byte is received). After forwarding the entire
packet, the slave immediately forgets it (in particular, it does *not*
accept that packet as a command).

* daisy-chain select, common data: (3 wires per slave) The host
serial-out pin is directly connected to every slave serial-in pin. In
addition, each chip has a select-in and a select-out pin. The host
select-out pin (which the host normally holds high) is connected to
the first slave select-in pin. Each slave select-out pin (which the
slave normally holds high) is connected to the select-in pin of the
next slave in the chain. When the slave-select line of a slave is
high, it "sleeps", ignoring the serial data line. When a slave sees
its select-in pin pulled low, it wakes up, accepts first command on
the common serial line (even if the command is "no-operation"), and
then pulls its own select-out pin low and goes back to sleep, ignoring
further commands until it is woken up again. When that slave sees its
select-in pin pulled hi, it immediately drives its own select-out pin
high and goes back to sleep. At some later time, when the slave sees
its select-in pin pulled low, it (as always) wakes up and accepts
exactly one command on the common serial line, then pulls its own
select-output line low. (Even while sleeping and ignoring most
commands on the common serial line, perhaps the slave might wake up on
the special "On my mark ... NOW!" synchronized start command addressed
to every slave).

Perhaps one of these protocols could be used to automatically assign
addresses whenever slaves are added, removed, or re-arranged, even if
some global broadcast net (transmitting addressed packets) were used
to transfer most data.

The "daisy-chain SPI" protocol has a name; do these other protocols have a name?
Is there a general name for this entire category of protocols, a
better name than "scalable" "simple" networking protocols?

--
David Cary
http://carybros.com/
http://opencircuits.com/
http://wikiindex.org/Pica-wiki
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com
http://www.piclist.com/member/DAV-MP-E62a
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_Peripheral_Interface_Bus
http://www.piclist.com/techref/postbot.asp?by=thread&id=%5BSX%5D+Bean%27s+SX28+8x8+PWM+Code+and+SX28+Addressable
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist