With regards to the reset behavior, we need to lay down what we want. If the CS8900A receives a reset, it does not keep the MAC address. At this point, we have a dilemma because if the RR-Net keeps its MAC address, this tells us that the RR reset button is not sending a reset to the CS8900A on the RR-Net board. However, the Net64 reset button DOES send a reset to the CS8900A.

This means we cannot have a board that is 100% compatible with both. So, do you want:

1) reset button to reset C64 but not the CS8900A

2) reset button to reset CS8900A but not the C64

3) reset button to reset both the CS8900A and the C64

I know option 2 is a ridiculous option. I included it because I thought it was funny.

Let me know.

i'd vote for (1) but i don't think that this is really important since i don't think that any developer trusts on some kind of defined behavior on a reset or am i wrong??!

OK, all. I have the first draft of the schematic done. Take a look at it and let me know if you see any bugs/features.

http://eric-b-pratt.com/projects/C64NIC/

Click on the 'Schematic' tab and you'll be able to see what I've done so far. The rest of the tabs will get filled in later.

With regards to the reset - I would like to keep the RR-Net behavior (reset C64 but keep MAC address), and this is why:

Some programs (i.e. WarpCopy64) don't set a MAC address on the RR-net when they are run. I guess they assume it was previously set i.e. by the Retro Replay ROM.

So, I use the excellent SETMAC program, posted right here on retrohackers, to set my MAC address before running WarpCopy.

However, I use the IDE64 cartridge, and SETMAC locks up my IDE64 when it's searching for an RR-Net. So, what I have to do is:

1. Load SETMAC.
2. KILL my IDE64 (disables it)
3. Run SETMAC.
4. Reset the C64. MAC address of the RR-net is retained, but IDE64 starts up again.
5. Run WarpCopy64.

Although, I already have a reset button on the C64, so it's not as critical that the reset on the cart does this.

Democracy in action. The reset button in the schematic will reset the C64, but not the CS8900a so the MAC address will remain in memory when we hit the reset button. During the board layout process, if necessary, I may end up revising the schematic to make the layout easier/simpler/better.

OK. I've cleaned up the schematic a little bit and I'm going to finalize part selection. There may be a delay in this. I just realized my GSEC certification exam deadline is fast running out and I really need to get my act together and study for the exam and take it. It might be a week or two before I get to the layout depending on the results of my practice exam.

I'm a dork with little to no imagination so if I don't get some ideas, I'll end up calling this card "PrattNet 64" or something lame like that. But, the reality is that I didn't do any real design work on this. All of the design came from the vendor's application note and feedback on this forum based on the Net64, TFE, and RR-Net cards with repsect to user needs/desires. So, naming this after me in any way seems like some sort of coat-tail riding.

So, any ideas for a name for this card?

Call it 8bitnet.

make sure you email me zap@c64web.com i will have one or two if price is right.....

paypal would be nice...

Any updates?

The RR-Nets are currently out of stock everywhere, so there's a market opportunity to satiate those looking for some C64 connectivity

As for names... 8bit-net? eightbit-net? PR-Net? (Like RR-Net, but first two letters of Pratt) ComNet?

Sorry for the lack of communication on this.

And sorry, I haven't looked at this yet. I'm going to take the GSEC practice test tonight and see how I'm doing. Depending on the results, I may study for a bit or get to work on the layout. I wont be taking the GSEC for at least one week regardless of the results so there is a chance I can get the layout going in the next week or two.

As for names . . . keep 'em comin'. I like the ones I've seen. I really don't know what to use so maybe if we get a number of them, we can put up a poll and see what the name will be.

I will be honest, I don't intend to go making a lot of money on these. I understand the lack of product in the market right now would make it possible for me to make money, but I'm really just doing this for fun. I'll still see if I can get these out quickly for those who are in the want, though.

Oh, by the way, I just thought of something. I lived in England for 3 years and found out very quickly that my last name (Pratt) is a bad word there. So, I don't know if people in the land of the never-setting sun would be too eager to buy something referencing the word "pratt" in its name. Never been to Canada or Australia so I don't know if it's an issue there.

I'm really not concerned, but I thought I'd just pass that along 'cause it's funny. I have to say that I think it's very awesome that my last name is a bad word in some foreign land. It's like a childhood dream. It's like I'm a cartoon character or something. Maybe the laws of physics don't apply to me either . . .

Hmm. I'm thinking.

How about "Sequel Net" .. It's a "sequel" to Net64 and at the same time it's pronounced as when saying really fast "C Equal" or "C=" Net. Do you follow? Or is it too far fetched? Works for me though

Sounds a lot like SQL server... Kinda farfetched too, makes me think of "chickenheadnet"

That's perfect, you got my vote! "C=hickenhead-net"

BTW put me down for 2 as well. Thanks.

How about "c64web"

Yeah i know ill slap myself later

This would be great ill run it on c64web.com webserver 24/7 it will free up the RetroReplay/RRNet cart's.

Alright guys. I'm not quite done with my GSEC testing but I've been studying and taking practice exams and I need a breather. So, of course, I started working on the parts selection for the network card. I've got everything selected except for the switches. These might change, mind you. Right now, I've got everything as surface mount as possible but looking at the nets and how I will have to lay them out, it looks like it might be a lot easier if some of these parts are through-hole instead. But the only things I will have to change would be capacitors and resistors and I'll do that as needed while laying out the board.

I changed some of the parts I had originally chosen. Of note, I am removing the DPDT switch around the inverter and just putting a SPDT switch on the output. Not sure what I was thinking with that DPDT switch in the first place to be honest. I will update the schematic with new parts and footprints that I might have to create in a library. After that, I'll get started on the layout.

I do want to ask you guys about the switches and case. To be quite honest, I'm thinking about not selling these things with a case, but making them "case friendly." By that I mean, you can simply cut holes and the necessary parts will protrude enough from the case to be easily accessible, but not so much that they don't seem like a good fit. This is actually proving to be a difficulty in the parts selection of the switches and buttons. They get expensive when they become convenient for this purpose, cheap when they are not. By expensive, I mean $3 - $6 for a single button/switch. Add three of those to the design and the cost of components starts to get outrageous.

So, do we want to go with jumpers or switches? Do you prefer low cost or convenience? If we go with switches, would an array of DIP switches be acceptable? The issue with DIP switches is that it would take two of them for the inversion of the address line to switch between RR-NET and Net64 modes. If you want to switch, you would have to remember to move two of them and to move then in the right order or only while the computer is off. I know that's not absolutely terrible, but I've worked IT for over 8 years now and I know how little things like that can aggravate people. That would be a very cheap solution. Which is preferable? Nice big switches with only one switch required for RR-NET/NET64 mode selection, or little tiny DIP switches with two switches for mode selection, but at a nice cost savings? Of course, as an alternative to DIP switches, we could go with jumpers which might be a better choice too. Either way, DIP switches or jumpers, the cartridge becomes less case friendly.

And, if there is anything else that separates RR-NET from Net64, now's the time to tell me. I don't own either of these and I don't know exactly how RR-NET interfaces with the RR cart and the C64. For instance, Schema, you said that you had software that searches for RR-NET and locks up your IDE64 when it doesn't find an RR-Net. Does the RR/RR-NET cart respond to queries in a way that my current design will not? Will that still be a problem? If so, do we care about that problem?