1701   New DO required for routable GOOSE and SMV service tracking

Created: 19 Jun 2020

Status: Verify Draft Implementation

Part: Part 7-4 (2020; Edition 2.1)

Links:

Page: 133

Clause: 6.3.9

Paragraph: 6.3.9

Issue

Issue has been raised by Adhoc Task Force Communication Supervision during the teleconference 18th of June 2020.
As it is requested to have only one DO instance of GocbTrk in the server, it make not possible to get both tracking of GoCB for Layer 2 GOOSE and GoCB for UDP/IP GOOSE. This is due to different types of PhyComAddr required that leads to get two DOTypes.
Same issue exists for MsvcbTrk and service tracking of UPD/IP SV.

Proposal

The group suggests to create :
* a new DO GocbUdpTrk implementing CDC GTS dedicated for the tracking of routable GOOSE Control Block. Existing GocbTrk DO is reserved for tracking of GoCB used for Layer 2 GOOSE.
* a new DO MsvcbUdpTrk implementing CDC MTS dedicated for the tracking of routable multicast SV Control Block. Existing MsvcbTrk DO is reserved for tracking of MSVCB used for Layer 2 SV.

Attachments:
    Note: To see attachments you have to log-in first.

Discussion Created Status
the attached draft implementation illustrates how the tissue resolution will apply in the NSDs.
New NSD schema is required.
16 Mar 21 Verify Draft Implementation
I think we can start verifying the draft implementation 03 Nov 20 Verify Draft Implementation
Proposal to change descriptions of DO in LNclass LTRK:
GocbTrk - Access service tracking for layer 2 GOOSE control blocks
MsvcbTrk - Access service tracking for layer 2 multicast sampled values control blocks

Add the following DO in LNclass LTRK:
GocbUdpTrk (CDC GTS) - Access service tracking for routable GOOSE control blocks
MsvcbUdpTrk (CDC MTS)- Access service tracking for routable multicast sampled values control blocks
Presense condition for both new DO: o / na.
04 Sep 20 Drafting Implementation
I would agree with the proposal. Just had a case today where I was confronted with that problem.

I move the TISSUE to discussion, and we should discuss if we agree that it is InterOp or if it shall be Future improvement. I would support Thierry to make it interop
08 Jul 20 Discussion (red)

 

Privacy | Contact | Disclaimer

Tissue DB v. 21.11.1.1