controls:protocols:bacnet:qna
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
controls:protocols:bacnet:qna [2020/10/02 21:27] – old revision restored (2020/09/30 02:55) 207.180.224.141 | controls:protocols:bacnet:qna [2020/10/04 07:06] (current) – old revision restored (2020/09/30 22:04) 178.151.245.174 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 115: | Line 115: | ||
- Christoph Zeller | - Christoph Zeller | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Status Indicator ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | ??? Are there any specific requirement for status indicators (LED) for BACnet? | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have Module & Network Status Led for Ethernet IP and its behavior is driven from standard. | ||
+ | Are there any specific requirement for status indicators for BACnet IP as well? I don’t see any in specifications? | ||
+ | |||
+ | -Gajanan S Bhatarkar | ||
+ | |||
+ | !!! | ||
+ | BACnet does not specify status indicator LEDs, for any of its datalinks. Any status indication on BACnet/IP and other media by LEDs is purely a product determination. | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Bernhard Isler | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== SubscribeCOVProperty ===== | ||
+ | ??? SubscribeCOVProperty with Large Analog Value Objects | ||
+ | |||
+ | While implementing new objects we found a potential issue: | ||
+ | |||
+ | How do I subscribe to the Present Value of a Large Analog Value object? | ||
+ | The service seems to use REAL only, DOUBLE seems not to be supported. | ||
+ | Is the COV_Increment supposed to support REAL only and we need to convert it internally? | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Frank Schubert | ||
+ | |||
+ | !!! | ||
+ | There was an Interpretation Request started during the last meeting in April dealing with this exact issue. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The basic question was stated as | ||
+ | The COV Increment in the SubscribeCOVProperty service is of datatype REAL, but the concept of a COV Increment applies to any numeric datatype (see 13.15.1.1.6). | ||
+ | |||
+ | The proposed interpretation offered by the author (Carl) was: | ||
+ | When the datatype of the monitored property is numeric, and not REAL, the server shall accept the COV Increment and convert it to the datatype of the monitored property. | ||
+ | |||
+ | My memory is that there were some rough edges in the Interpretation Request language that made simple agreement problematic, | ||
+ | |||
+ | -Cliff Copass |
controls/protocols/bacnet/qna.1601674056.txt.gz · Last modified: 2020/10/02 21:27 by 207.180.224.141