KWP2000 over CANopen, J1939

> -----Original Message-----
> From: canlist-owner@...
> [mailto:canlist-owner@...] On
> Behalf Of Rotti, Prasad (IE10)
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 12:37 PM
> To: canlist@...
> Subject: RE: [CANLIST] KWP2000 over CANopen, J1939
>
> Hello Juergen,
>
> If I understand correctly, you are trying to say that KWP2000
> as a protocol can be used in combination with either J1939 or CANopen.
>
> Now with so many variants of CAN existing is there any
> suggestion on how to implement the app layer, so that one
> seamlessly integrates the different variants like J1939,
> CANopen. A customer may just want CANopen today, whereas a
> different one tomorrow may request for the J1939 with CCP and
> another one the J1939 with KWP. How does one handle such
> changes efficiently?
>
> Is anything happening on this front, so that number of
> variants are reduced? Or do we have to live with it?
>
> Rgrds,
> Prasad
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: canlist-owner@...
> [mailto:canlist-owner@...] On
> Behalf Of Klüser, Jürgen
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 3:42 PM
> To: canlist@...
> Subject: RE: [CANLIST] KWP2000 over CANopen, J1939
>
> Hello Prasad,
>  
> J1939 - here you can find many combinations in the market.
> KWP2000, UDS, J1939 specific diagnostics are mixed and run in
> parallel on CAN. Nearly every manufacturer has his own
> approach here. Currently there are many activities to
> harmonize that. I am not a specialist on that, perhaps
> someone else will answer more detailled.
>  
> CANopen - CANopen has a different approach. It provides an
> interface (object dictionary) where diagnostic objects and
> functions can be integrated. The communication protocol
> allows appropriate access to these objects.
>  
> Anyhow there are more and more requirements to use automotive
> standards for diagnostics via CANopen networks. The point is,
> that a CANopen network has to be seen from the application
> point of view: A concrete application will have a set of
> services, that are used in the network. This is the base for
> the configuration of the network. Dependent on that
> configuration you can use any other protocols like KWP, UDS
> or XCP / CCP in parallel.
>  
> This does not really help a device manufacturer, since you
> always have the task of the system integrator ensuring the
> right configuration.
>  
> Therefore CiA more and more focuses not only on device
> profiles, but also on so-called application profiles. Here
> also the relation between devices is specified. With this
> approach pre-defined (or "standardized") diagnostics get
> possible. For example the application profile
> car-add-on-devices CiA447 explicitly introduced the usage of
> UDS diagnostics within CANopen. It assigns CAN-IDs for these
> services. The protocol itself is to be used as specified in UDS.
>  
> In principle the very same is possible with KWP. But if you
> are going to design future stuff, it is worth thinking about UDS.
>
> I hope, these few words do not make more confusion, but help
> a little bit.
> Best Regards / Mit freundlichen Gruessen
> Juergen Klueser
> -------------------------------------------------
> Global Product Line Manager PON
> Open Networking Tools and Components
> Vector Informatik GmbH
> Ingersheimer Strasse 24
> D-70499 Stuttgart, Germany
> Phone: +49 711 80670-202
> Fax:   +49 711 80670-249
> Email: juergen.klueser@...
> Internet: http://www.vector-informatik.de 
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: canlist-owner@...
> [mailto:canlist-owner@...] On
> Behalf Of Rotti, Prasad (IE10)
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 10:35 AM
> To: canlist@...
> Subject: [CANLIST] KWP2000 over CANopen, J1939
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I have may have asked this question earlier, but I have
> still not been able to get a clear answer for this.
>
>
>
> From what I know, KWP2000 (ISO 15765) is standard for
> Diagnostics over CAN. CANopen, J1939 are one of the many
> application layer implementations.
>
> Can KWP2000 be used on CANopen, J1939 or do they have a
> separate protocol for diagnostics over CAN? I searched over
> the net, but did not find anyone using CANopen or J1939 in
> conjunction with KWP2000, so am a bit confused.
>
>
>
> We have implemented a simple protocol in our module for
> diagnostics over CAN. Now a customer is asking us to follow
> the KWP2000 protocol for the same. Also there are couple of
> other customers who want CAN communication to be as per
> CANopen and J1939 respt. So can I go ahead and implement the
> KWP2000 protocol stack and use it in my product irrespective
> of CANopen, J1939, etc.
>
>
>
> Rgrds,
>
> Prasad
>
>
>
> --
> Archives and useful links: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CANbus
> Subscribe and unsubscribe at www.vector-informatik.com/canlist/
> Report any problems to <canlist-owner@...>
> --
> Archives and useful links: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CANbus
> Subscribe and unsubscribe at www.vector-informatik.com/canlist/
> Report any problems to <canlist-owner@...>
>