On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 08:21:09PM +0100, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> On 22.01.2011 19:42, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 07:07:22PM +0100, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> > 
> > 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. ...
> 
> Do you know why people invented VLANs or multiple IPs bound to a single
> ethernet interface?
I think I do understand.
I personally haven't used VLAN's much, and multiple IPs bound to a single
netdev mostly so far as they belong to a different segment.

In the scenario:
$ip addr add 192.168.0.1/24 dev lan
$ip addr add 192.168.0.2/24 dev lan
I had difficulties finding programs that allow you to control the source IP.
'ping' is one, and the only one I needed then.

But this compares very close to what I want to do with J1939 on CAN.

> So far you missed that step entirely.
IMHO, this is poor argumentation.
> 
> > I'm quite convinced my concept here is right.
This too.

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

Reply via email to