That was one of the original goals of Zeroconf. In 2002, Stuart Cheshire said [1]:
> My hope is that in the future — distant future perhaps — your computer will only need one wired communication technology. It will provide power on the connector like USB and FireWire, so it can power small peripheral devices. It will use IP packets like Ethernet, so it provides your wide-area communications for things like email and Web browsing, but it will also use Zeroconf IP so that connecting local devices is as easy as USB or FireWire is today. People ask me if I'm seriously suggesting that your keyboard and mouse should use the same connector as your Internet connection, and I am. There's no fundamental reason why a 10Mb/s Ethernet chip costs more than a USB chip. The problem is not cost, it is lack of power on the Ethernet connector, and (until now) lack of autoconfiguration to make it work. I would much rather have a computer with a row of identical universal IP communications ports, where I can connect anything I want to any port, instead of today's situation where the computer has a row of different sockets, each dedicated to its own specialized function.
Sadly, instead of using existing successful networking systems and automating the configuration, we've created a new union-of-all-possible-protocols with a new connector (or 5) and made understanding the compatibility matrix a nightmare.
I didn't know about that interview, thanks for sharing. It seems so natural to me to go for the one technology that fits all needs (Ethernet+POE and possibly a smaller connector). All it would need is a big player to implement that, then release the changes for free with no strings attached, but probably most parties involved can't squeeze the same profits out of open technologies.
Here's an idea to push for this technology. I have no way to develop this, neither the technical knowledge nor the money required, but comments welcome anyway. Essentially I would:
1- design a smaller connector that could host all Ethernet pairs plus power supply,
say a smaller RJ45 with contacts on both sides, no need to reinvent the wheel here.
2- for testing purposes, build a small bridge board (a matchbox sized black box) between the socket and the
original Ethernet plug and a nearby USB port for power alone. Ethernet pairs would pass untouched (or possibly
replicated through a switch chipset+magnetics) while the bridge board would contain any necessary circuit to power
any load connected to the updated Ethernet port(s). Remember we're aiming at ditching USB for that purpose, that's why I
wouldn't map Ethernet on an USB-Eth chip even for testing; and all power would be taken by the device supply asap.
3- Now we have some cheap hardware which is easy to replicate to use on every platform, including SBCs where the
USB connector could be spared because we take all power from the board. Let's move to software.
Some proof of concept would be needed to demonstrate that, so here's my question: how hard would be to satisfy point
[1] and build some hardware (mice, keyboards, audio etc) that can use the new network standard to show its benefits
to the industry?
Aah, that's a beautiful dream of a unified, wired communication technology standard.
That's what we need more of, a coherent vision to guide design and development. Early Apple had that, it feels like, then lost the coherence in the 2010's. The phrase "design by committee" is often used to characterize what not to do, so it seems design by a small focused group or individual tends to go in the right direction. But there must be real-world examples of successful "design committees" or "standards bodies", who avoided the gravity/entropy towards producing monsters of complexity and compromise..
> My hope is that in the future — distant future perhaps — your computer will only need one wired communication technology. It will provide power on the connector like USB and FireWire, so it can power small peripheral devices. It will use IP packets like Ethernet, so it provides your wide-area communications for things like email and Web browsing, but it will also use Zeroconf IP so that connecting local devices is as easy as USB or FireWire is today. People ask me if I'm seriously suggesting that your keyboard and mouse should use the same connector as your Internet connection, and I am. There's no fundamental reason why a 10Mb/s Ethernet chip costs more than a USB chip. The problem is not cost, it is lack of power on the Ethernet connector, and (until now) lack of autoconfiguration to make it work. I would much rather have a computer with a row of identical universal IP communications ports, where I can connect anything I want to any port, instead of today's situation where the computer has a row of different sockets, each dedicated to its own specialized function.
[1]: http://www.stuartcheshire.org/TheIdeaBasket.html
Sadly, instead of using existing successful networking systems and automating the configuration, we've created a new union-of-all-possible-protocols with a new connector (or 5) and made understanding the compatibility matrix a nightmare.