On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 07:07:22PM +0100, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> 
> Independently from the fact that i do not have any general objections to add
> some infrastructure to af_can.c to redirect netlink messages, i wonder if your
> address concept is addressing the correct layer ?!?
ok, I'll try to address this question ...
> 
> If you tweak your CAN protocol with addresses bound to a specific CAN
> interface this has a system-wide effect. So your Linux box can only act as a
> specific J1939 node as restricted by the given addresses above.
on a pure j1939 network, a box is intended to use only de addresses given above.
I assume that a given box can use multiple addressess, each of them configured
with '$ ip addr add ...'
> 
> The idea of SocketCAN is to have independent CAN applications on a single host
> that may communicate with each other - not knowing whether they are on the
> same host or on different hosts.
> 
> IMHO the addresses for CAN protocols need to be specified on a per-socket
> basis - and not as a system-wide restriction bound to CAN interfaces.
I disagree here. The way I look at it, is that an CAN device will get
1 (or more, but that a bit more complicated to expleain) SA. Whichever 
application
that binds, will now use that SA. I can then build up my device by different
applications, cooperating to form a single entity on CAN (even within the 
virtual
SocketCAN bus). As such, I can have 1 app just spitting out 1 second status 
message,
1 app sending DM1 msgs, 1 app sending regular IO updates, ....

When adding addresses per socket, each app will need to know what
SA it is supposed to work with, which leads to malconfigurations ...

I rather compare the addressing of J1939 with IP, or at least I'd like
to deal with them in the same way. A node may use e.g. 0x80, but if I
want that to change to 0x81, I change it on 1 place and all traffic changes
with me. ...

I'm quite convinced my concept here is right.

Regards,
Kurt
_______________________________________________
Socketcan-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core

Reply via email to