Talk:Ethernet Powerlink

Dated?
This seems dated, since most Ethernets have used switches for many years and so do not have the collisions mentioned here. More on when this was used (if ever?) needs to be clarified. W Nowicki (talk) 22:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

This is a realtime industrial protocol, where latency must be avoided. Switches have very high latency, so powerlink uses hubs instead. Powerlink is in use today.Brolin (talk) 09:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

EPL runs on standard Ethernet hardware and avoids collisions based on the master controlling all communications (polling slaves for responses). Compare this with ProfiNet or EtherCat which require specialized Ethernet hardware to avoid collisions. Switches should be avoided because the cause latency, but that problem is getting better as the electronics speed up. You still generally should not use switches with EPL, but you can in a pinch; for instance, try finding a hub at your local electronics store (not going to happen). As far as when it was used and by who, it's been in use since 2001 and is currently (end of 2013) used in 9% (for comparison, ModbusTCP is 17% and Ethernet/IP and ProfiNet are both 30%) of all industrial Ethernet applications and 20% of Real-Time, Deterministic industrial Ethernet applications (second only to ProfiNet. Its share is growing quickly due to increasing market penetration of B&R industrial hardware. EPL is state of the art, it's on the way up, not the way out. .50.78.52.249 (talk) 21:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

More info on version differences?
They are currently on EPLv2 which is quite a big difference from EPLv1, but I don't know the gritty details on protocol changes. They've also introduced Poll Response Chaining to cut down on cycle times. I've heard EPLv3 might happen when IEEE 1588 updates.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ethernet Powerlink. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120817070946/http://www.arcweb.com/strategy-reports/2012-04-12/opensafety-initiative-aims-to-unify-industrial-safety-protocols.aspx to http://www.arcweb.com/strategy-reports/2012-04-12/opensafety-initiative-aims-to-unify-industrial-safety-protocols.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)