On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 14:11 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote: > The details are in net/can/j1939-ac.c, but I'll summarize:
Thanks! > > Maybe that's a ISO11783 feature and not used in J1939 - I'm not sure > > about... > In fact, we supposed that j1939-81 is rather equal to iso11783-5, but we > did not verify letter by letter. > So, yes. But I remark here that on a proper system, whenever a conflicting > address claim comes in, your own address claim should be reissued, thereby > initiating a 250msec timeout again... Yep, that also conforms to ISO11783. > The kernel considers the arbitration, but does not act. The address claiming > process itself (with its policy) is a userspace task. The kernel just follows > the process and hold traffic during the process. Ok. Thanks. Cheers, Felix _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
