Re: J1939 support: plans for integration?

[Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1679 bytes --]

On 11/28/2012 04:00 PM, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:47:17PM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> On 11/28/2012 02:43 PM, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:56:09AM +0100, Christoph Appel wrote:
>>>> Hello Kurt,
>>>>
>>>> Am 23.11.2012 06:52, schrieb Kurt Van Dijck:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>> [...]
>>>>> How do you use the current J1939 stack?
>>>> I am in the early process of evaluating possibilities
>>>> deploying J1939 in farm machinery (primary
>>>> data logging purposes with a couple of bus requests).
>>>
>>> FYI, we (EIA Electronics) have certified a Virtual Terminal
>>> using this j1939 stack. The certification process went
>>> very smooth for the networking tests.
>>
>> like telnet?
> telnet on j1939?
> 
> No, I meant the test that are preformed during this isobus certification
> on the isobus (J1939) networking level, like dynamic addressing behaviour,
> Transport protocol, ...
> A beautifull set of nasty corner cases is verified then.
> I was a bit curious to the results since I had spent some time on that code.
> 
> Being certified at least means that the j1939 stack, together with the userspace programs,
> is functionally ready for production.
> 
> Isobus (on CAN networking equal to j1939) has become the 'de facto' standard for agriculture
> machinery...

\o/ - one step closer to world domination

Marc
-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                  | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Industrial Linux Solutions        | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Vertretung West/Dortmund          | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686  | http://www.pengutronix.de   |


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 261 bytes --]