Request for proposals: Communications physical layer
Request for proposals on physical layer definitions
So far, the only viable physical layer definition proposal has been the CAN bus family (ISO 11898, ISO 11992, ISO 17356, EN 50325-xx, etc.)
Other protocols that have been mentioned are:
- PMB, which is used for batteries and power systems. It relies on I2C which is not reliable over cables, and requires at least three separate wires (full implementation requires 4).
- LIN, an intermediate between RS232 and CAN. Similar to I2C, but designed for reliability, requires only one wire (supports the same hardware interfaces as CAN), and is a pure master-slave architecture.
However CAN (in both the single-ended or differential variant) seems preferable in terms of industry penetration and existing infrastructure and overall reliability.
Please, if you have any additional proposals submit it to the communication subcommittee reflector or to me. The choice of physical interface would enable other aspects of the protocol, so the upper protocol layers will be based on what this allows.
Also, even within the CAN family, there are several upper-level protocols in use (e.g., OpenCAN). If you, or your team, have any opinion regarding these, please make your opinion heard in the main group and subcommittees.
------
Edgar Brown
Subcommittee chair
UPAMD Communications
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the UPAMD-COMMS list, click the following link:
http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=UPAMD-COMMS&A=1