On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 07:06:45PM +0100, christian pellegrin wrote: > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Paul Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes, I had originally thought osm was needed because when I watched an open > > bus. I would see continuous traffic after a send. I didn't want to get into > > a situation where if one of 4 nodes died the retries to the dead node ate up > > the whole bus, but that's NOT what I see. As long as there is 1 good node, a > > packet to a non-existent node is not retried. CAN packets have _no_ destination. Therefore, it's illegal to say 'a packet to a node'. Such statements create confusion.
Kurt _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
