![]() |
|
|||||||
| RDM Timing Discussion Discussion and questions relating to the timing requirements of RDM. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#4 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 8
|
Hi Eric
Separate from EE memory writes, which I agree can be handled as you describe, there are other reasons a responder needs more time e.g. when it is a proxy or bridge/gateway device to where the data should be going. Such a device can indeed store some or even many SET requests but at some point it can lead to an overrun in some practical device, that is the case I meant to be referring to also. To the standard defining folks: With regards to the 10 to 20 ms back-off as Eric is suggesting in practice for a controller to handle the overrun issues, are there plans on integrating in the standard a number as a suggested spec for this, or somehow a way informing a controller on responder capabilities on this point? Leaving this point open and up to implementation can (and probably will) lead to incompatibilities between equipments that in a large part could be prevented by some agreement and future definition on this point. A related aspect to this is also that the real life figure of 5 to 20 ms is often sufficient to handle these situations while the ACK_TIMER has a granularity of 100 ms. These large time chunks lead to extraordinary long delays that can be reduced a lot by allowing, in addition to the current definition, some finer grained timing. Very interested to hear your opinions! Greetings Marc |
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Is there a minimum required PID list for sub-devices? | p_richart | RDM Interpretation Questions | 4 | November 7th, 2008 01:04 PM |
| broadcast Disvovery Mute/Unute | berntd | RDM Interpretation Questions | 2 | April 8th, 2008 10:07 PM |