Re: [foxboro] SLC505 direct to FBM233?
- From: "Russ Kaiser" <russ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 16:02:36 -0500
Alex,
I'm sorry if I ruffled any Invensys feathers and maybe I didn't' since
emails don't transmit expression. It was not my intention, I assure you.
The throughput of the FBM 232/233 is amazing compared to the old INT30s,
multiple driver capability or rewriting the EthernetIP driver to offer a SLC
choice in the DVOPT would be a welcome addition to Foxboro's arsenal.
Russ
>-----Original Message-----
>From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of Johnson, Alex P (IOM)
>Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 3:30 PM
>To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [foxboro] SLC505 direct to FBM233?
>
>Russ,
>
>Re: CSP FDSI driver documentation
>You can drop a line to the "IOM I/A Series Device Integration" group at
>iasdi@xxxxxxxxxxxx and ask them for information on the drivers including
>user manuals.
>
>Re: adding another FBM
>At one time, the intent was to allow support of multiple drivers supporting
>different protocols in the same FBM, I don't know if it was implemented,
>but you can always ask.
>
>Re: one FBM 233 can talk to a couple dozen CLX processors, but it can't
>talk
>to 1 CLX and 1 SLC
>It all boils down to the physical layer and the languages that the stations
>talk.
>
>If the CLX and SLC have a common tongue, one FDSI might suffice, if not,
>you need more than one.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Alex Johnson
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
Other related posts:
