+1 for complex types
Matthias Strljic, M.Sc.
Universität Stuttgart
Institut für Steuerungstechnik der Werkzeugmaschinen und
Fertigungseinrichtungen (ISW)
Seidenstraße 36
70174 Stuttgart
GERMANY
Tel: +49 711 685-84530
Fax: +49 711 685-74530
E-Mail: matthias.strl...@isw.uni-stuttgart.de
Web:
Hi Chris and Julian,
it is both. Yesterday I worked a bit on the client integration of Milo, so that
we wrap Milo in a PLC4X Driver. I hope that i get there further tonight.
I am happy to get some LC
We (Student and me) are also working on a Protocol Bridge as a thesis. There we
struggeled
Hi Matthias,
first, +1 for OPC UA Integration (Both ways, Driver and Bridge) and another +1
for bringing it to the list : )
As I recall Chris is considering treating the OPC UA Bridge thing as a
prioritized Ticket, so its really best if you get in touch.
The other thing which comes along with
Hi Chris and Rolf,
i played yesterday a bit with Milo and PLC4X and would make a integration of
Milo in the PLC4J version in this week. There u would have to excuse my noobish
coding after 8 Months of only PP-Engineering. It would be first limited to the
Base-Types and could be later replaced
Hi Rolf,
I sort of didn’t see the intermediate emails on the list, so replying to
multiple ones here … as I manually had to release this one, I guess you are not
all subscribed to the mailing list. Please do so by sending an email to
Hi Julian,
thanks for adding us here.
We are currently not working with PLC4X but the topic looks quite
promissing to jump onto. At the moment we have a lot of PLX connection
implementations done by our own which is ... work.
Are there any news in regard to the meetup date? I put my availability
Hi Otto,
I guess you are referring to OPC-UA ... well of course we should support that
... but as currently the performance of OPC-UA on PLCs is so extremely crappy I
would personally like to postpone that a little. But I would never object
anyone wanting to work on that ... wanna get your
RFC 62541?
On April 18, 2019 at 05:38:56, Christofer Dutz (christofer.d...@c-ware.de)
wrote:
Perfect ;-)
Am 18.04.19, 11:34 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" :
Hi Chris,
indeed.
So lets simply use the terms opc-ua server or bridge and opc-ua client : )
Do you agree?
Julian
Am 18.04.19, 11:32
Perfect ;-)
Am 18.04.19, 11:34 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" :
Hi Chris,
indeed.
So lets simply use the terms opc-ua server or bridge and opc-ua client : )
Do you agree?
Julian
Am 18.04.19, 11:32 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" :
Hi Julian,
Hi Chris,
indeed.
So lets simply use the terms opc-ua server or bridge and opc-ua client : )
Do you agree?
Julian
Am 18.04.19, 11:32 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" :
Hi Julian,
That's what I mentioned in the other email.
We have to be careful with the term OPC-UA Support and
Hi Julian,
That's what I mentioned in the other email.
We have to be careful with the term OPC-UA Support and differentiate between
OPC-UA Server and OPC-UA Client (PLC4X opc-ua client)
I was talking about a OPC-UA Server ... you seem to be about a client. For the
Server we wouldn't need the
Hi all,
and regarding the fieldbus protocols:
- We purchased the full spec of the Profinet protocol and will register a
profinet-id in the next few weeks. Implementing this would only be limited by
the time we have and the willingness to do so ;-)
- EtherCat is where our Raw Sockets would have
Hi Chris,
there are two ways.. and you are doing the other one, I think : )
You are talking about the OPC UA interface for other drivers, or?
There, you do that implicitly by your config, so this is fine.
But, especially when we start to implement an OPC UA Driver, this will fall on
our feet :
Hi Bjoern,
One thing we have to keep in mind with that code is that it's licensed under
the Mozilla Public License v2.0, which is a weak copy-left license.
While it's not forbidden to use that, we have to be careful in using it and we
have to correctly label it [1]
The other thing is that
Hi Markus,
I agree with you.
And, as one can see in my mail.. there are multple efforts which are currently
going.
So perhaps, if we focus a bit, we should reach first results pretty fast.
But I think one necessity is a refactoring to a complex type model.
I will file a Jira for that.
Julian
Hi Julian and all others ...
I would like to add another thing:
It would be great if we could also provide something I would call "Agents".
Currently PLC4X support talking to PLCs in a protocol they already support.
Yesterday I had a chat with guys from Phoenix Contact which also have an
16 matches
Mail list logo
