[Tinyos-help] interoperability of tinyos with edge router
Hi, We have created a 6LoWPAN network with the nodes with TinyOS running on it. We also have developed an edge router for accessing these nodes from external network. Linux is running on the Edge Router. The interoperability between TinyOS nodes and the router is not achieved because the TinyOS 802.15.4 header is having additional two fields (network and type), which is not parsed at the TinyOS node when a packet is received from Edge Router. TinyOS code is organized in such a way that the the receiver and the sender should have the same value of the type field.. This fields is always included even we use the Blip stack.But these field are not available in other operating systems like Linux . TinyOS is using 802.15.3 2003 specification whereas the Linux is using the new 802.15.3 2006 specification that has modified the header fields. So,what are the modifications required to make the interoperability between the TinyOS and other operating systems to work especially Linux. Regards, Md.Jamal --- This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies and the original message. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited and appropriate legal action will be taken. --- ___ Tinyos-help mailing list Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
Re: [Tinyos-help] Tiny os and Contiki
Generally speaking, and I'm a bit biased, the TinyOS code is much more solid and efficient. But you're right that Contiki has a more active developer community. The TinyOS code that's there is rock solid, but our user-facing side could be better. Also, more active development on MCU and RFIC advances would be great. I'm interested in the comment that following the installation instructions doesn't work; I had a student start playing with TinyOS and he said he was startled at how trivial and easy it was to get up and running. Phil --- Philip Levis Associate Professor Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Stanford University http://csl.stanford.edu/~pal On Jan 9, 2014, at 8:52 AM, Rahav Dor (yahoo) rah...@yahoo.com wrote: I tend to agree with your comment, but leaving outside the kind of support requests you mentioned, I still have hopes for TinyOS. Right now it does not feel as a vibrant, active community. On top of that our public facing information is often incorrect or incomplete, just try to install it by following TinyOS web site and see where it would get you. I believe that our work products should be usable by others. With the potential of all-things-embedded, or Internet of Things, or whatever you want to call it, TinyOS will not be successful if we forget this. Rahav Dor On Thursday, January 9, 2014 9:12 AM, Saeid Yazdani sy.kal...@gmail.com wrote: TinyOS is not ment to have support. A researcher at least in the case of embedded systems or WSN PhD position should not need any support...I see many people here who are researchers and they don't know basic C programming. I agree that support is a good thing but people shouldn't relay on others to cut out the work for them. Kust y thoughts... On 9 Jan 2014 16:04, Rahav Dor (yahoo) rah...@yahoo.com wrote: You should also consider support. I've been using TinyOS for research purposes for a while and I can tell you that it seems like a dying product. Or at least one, that not too many people care about. It takes days if not longer to get a response on this forum. I do not know how Contiki is doing in this respect, but if this continues, the my current project is going to be the last on TinyOS. Rahav Dor ___ Tinyos-help mailing list Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help ___ Tinyos-help mailing list Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help ___ Tinyos-help mailing list Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
Re: [Tinyos-help] Anaren A1101R09x CC1101 based 900MHz motes
On 01/09/2014 09:53 PM, Eric Decker wrote: I don't know of any others but the LSR module qualifies. I don't know how all the FCC stuff works. So I don't know if one puts one's own code onto the LSR module if that invalidates the FCC validation. Not according the the Anaren folks. I had interpreted the FCC rules, (reading them myself), a little too strictly, and thought the FCC wanted keyed physical modules between radio module and the rest of system so that the user was stopped from being able to change the transmit details of power and frequency. It turns out that all the FCC demands is you, (meaning the TinyOS coder/user/customer for a radio module), is made aware of what not to do, and then they know about the potential for fines, (huge), that would go to a customer misapplying the Anaren or LSR module. But, no, putting TinyOS on the LSR module is OK with the FCC, as long as you pay attention to LSR's chart of allowed radio settings for their module. The chart for the CC1101 is all laid out by Anaren here: http://www.anaren.com/sites/default/files/user-manuals/A1101R09x_Users_Manual_2.pdf p. 12 I've got a port of TinyOS that is mostly done to the LSR module. It has a 5437a talking to CC2520/2591. Congrats! John ___ Tinyos-help mailing list Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
