Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
INTRODUCTION
Ethernet networks have been successfully used on the factory floor for the past 15 years,
mainly in non time-critical applications. Evolution of the Ethernet technology (more
accurately IEEE Std 802.1 and IEEE Std 802.3 technologies) from a 10Mbps, halfduplex, bus/tree topology into a 100Mbps and 1Gbps, full duplex, switch/router based
hierarchical star topology has created an opportunity for utilizing Ethernet in industrial
networks supporting time-critical applications.
Ethernet/Industrial Protocol (EtherNet/IPTM) is a communication system suitable for use in
industrial environments and time-critical applications [1]. It utilizes standard Ethernet and
TCP/IP technologies and an open Application Layer protocol called Control and Information
Protocol (CIP). CIP is also used in ControlNet and DeviceNet networks.
In EtherNet/IPTM networks, exchange of time-critical data is based on the producer/consumer
model where a transmitting device (host or end-node) produces data on the network and
many receiving devices can consume this data simultaneously. Implementation of the
producer/consumer data exchange is based on the Internet Protocol (IP) multicast service
mapped over the Ethernet multicast service.
EtherNet/IPTM supported functions include:
61
Performance of the time-critical data exchange can be illustrated based on the following
example. The currently achievable average end-to-end response time in an EtherNet/IPTM
based control system with eight produces and one consumer is 7ms.
Input/Output (I/O) data and status produced by a remote I/O device for consumption
by one or more programmable controllers
62
Controller 1
PC
Switch
I/O11
I/O12
I/O13
I/O21
I/O22
63
RECOMMENDATIONS
In order to optimize network performance, design of the EtherNet/IPTM infrastructure should
be based on the following objectives:
1. Minimize device load due to unwanted IP multicast traffic
Depending on sub-net configuration and required device connectivity, this objective can be
achieved using Ethernet switches supporting virtual LANs (VLANs) and IP multicast
routing.
If a switch is shared between for example, two isolated EtherNet/IPTM networks, then each
network can be configured as a separate VLAN as it is shown in Figure 2. Here, ports 1, 3,
4, 5, and 6 belong to VLAN 1. Ports 2, 7, and 8 belong to VLAN 2. Since IP multicast
packets are flooded only to devices inside each VLAN, devices will be less loaded than in the
configuration shown in Figure 1.
PC
Controller1
Controller2
3
Switch
VLAN 1
I/O11
I/O12
VLAN 2
I/O13
I/O21
I/O22
If EtherNet/IP devices need to share time-critical data, then they have to be connected to
the same VLAN. Figure 3 depicts an example of an EtherNet/IPTM VLAN within a two-layer
switch hierarchy. The VLAN is configured at the Layer 3 switch and consists of devices
connected to three Layer 2 switches. If Layer 2 switches in this example do not support IP
multicast routing, then multicast packets from Controller B (Producer) will flood all ports of
these switches. Support of Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) snooping, or other
functionally equivalent feature, in Layer 2 switches will eliminate multicast flood through
them and, as a result of that, additional load in end-devices due to unwanted IP multicast
traffic, which, in its turn, will improve control system performance. When IGMP snooping is
enabled, IP multicast packets produced by Controller B will be routed only to controllers A,
C, and D registered with the Layer 3 switch built-in router as members of the same multicast
group.
64
Layer 3 Switch
(Router)
Layer 2 Switch
Controller A
(Consumer)
Layer 2 Switch
Controller B
(Producer)
Layer 2 Switch
Controller C
(Consumer)
Controller D
(Consumer)
65
TEST RESULTS
EtherNet/IPTM examples shown in Figures 1 to 3 are simplified versions of configurations
used during performance and interoperability tests of Rockwell Automation EtherNet/IPTM
products. VLANs and IGMP Snooping have successfully tested in configurations utilizing
Cisco Catalyst 3550 (Layer 3) and 2950 (Layer 2) switches and Enterasys Networks Vertical
Horizon VH-2403-L3 (Layer 3) and 2H252-25R Smart Switch 2200 (Layer 2) switches.
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we have characterized the EtherNet/IPTM traffic and provided recommendations
aimed to optimize network, and ultimately control system, performance.
These
recommendations are based on utilization of switching devices in the EtherNet/IPTM
infrastructure that possess specific features, like IGMP Snooping, aiming to minimize enddevice and switch loading with unwanted traffic as well as propagation of the such a traffic to
and from a plant network.
ISSUES
The following issues have been identified during performance and interoperability tests of
EtherNet/IPTM products performed by Rockwell Automation:
Inconsistency of IP multicast control features (what they do and how they work)
between network switch vendors and in some cases even between different classes of
products produced by the same vendor.
Lack of IP multicast control, support of the IEEE 802.3 spanning tree protocol and
other appropriate features in some low-end switches, which considerably limits their
use in non-isolated EtherNet/IPTM networks.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Terms defined below have been copied from [2] and [3] with some tailoring to EtherNet/IPTM
terminology where appropriate.
IEEE 802.1
The IEEE standard for bridging 802.3 local area networks (LANs).
IEEE 802.3
The IEEE standard for Ethernet.
66
67
REFERENCES
TM
TRADEMARKS
TM
68