There's a variety of flavors of in-car networking standards that corral the large number of embedded computers and nodes present in the modern automobile. BMW Research and Technology, an R&D division of BMW, has found Internet Protocol up to the tasks that the other standards currently perform. BMW engineers used a standard PC and connected it up to the expected gear -- ECUs, engine and chassis control systems, even a multimedia server for the entertainment system. The reasoning behind using IP versus the more specialized protocols is to anticipate future needs and requirements, as well as reducing costs. Costs drop because fewer specialized components are needed, and the new version of IPv6 is even better than the more than fine performance from IPv4. It's a little spooky to think that your fly-by-wire throttle could be trying to chat with the engine using the same technology that we use to send instant messages, but IP proved itself capable enough even for critical safety functions. The research is ongoing, but BMW's work bodes well for adding functionality and decreasing costs. Adding aftermarket goodies should be fairly painless and service shops will also have an easier time of it by going with a more universal language. Imagine surfing the web with iDrive, though. Blech.
[Source: Automotive Design Line, Photo: Zercustoms]
REPORT: Racer dies in 24 Hours of LeMons crash
VIDEO: Danica Patrick hits crew member on pit lane at Indy
Nick Hogan sentenced to 8 months in jail
Pontiac El Cami-"NO"
Spy Shots: Baby Cayenne caught on 'Ring!
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
First Drive: 2009 Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen
Project Track Slut, Part One: Pick a weapon on the cheap
By the Numbers: April 2008
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Paul P. @ Dec 1st 2007 5:36PM
It's amazing how complicated cars are getting. It's going to get to the point where they can do everything, but drive.
I wish I could still order a car with roll up windows, manual locks, no A/C, no sun roof, no radio, no nothing.
Ordering it that way would reduce weight (which will help performance and fuel economy), it would cost less, it would make for a very reliable vehicle, and it would help to keep the driver focused on the road (instead of on their nav system/radio/phone/climate control/ect).
I mean, do we really need half the stuff we can get in cars now, especially if getting rid of some features would offer a significant increase in all-around performance? Most people I know can't figure out all of the features available in their car anyway, never mind use them all on a regular basis.
I'm not saying don't offer luxury features, I'm just saying we need to bring back the stripped out models too. Not just on a little roadster like the Honda S2K-CR either.
James Sonne @ Dec 1st 2007 6:03PM
Shop for a Corolla, Versa, or Hyundai recently?
RP @ Dec 1st 2007 10:01PM
Yeah, just wait 'til the Microsoft WinCE "Sync" stereo, or iDrive, begins a DOS (Denial of Service) attack and flooding the IP network, and stops the drive-by-wire throttle from talking to the engine, or the ECU can't modulate the ABS.
Dario @ Dec 3rd 2007 12:11PM
You can get a Hyundai Accent with no power windows, locks, sunroof, radio or A/C - MSRP is under $11k. Same for the Elantra, except it comes with power windows and locks standard. Good luck finding those on the lot though.
Quattrofan @ Dec 1st 2007 5:56PM
It's all good until you get: Error 404 - File Not Found!
bison @ Dec 1st 2007 11:30PM
You're thinking of HTTP (hyper-text transfer protocol); this IPv6 (Internet Protocol), one level down the network stack.
Acil @ Dec 3rd 2007 3:50AM
Actually, HTTP is layer 7 and IP is layer 3... but still, way off there ;)
Quattrofan @ Dec 3rd 2007 4:01AM
NERDZ!
James Sonne @ Dec 1st 2007 6:02PM
IP is simply a way of packaging data, and not specifically to do with the Internet.
why not the LS2LS7? @ Dec 1st 2007 6:11PM
Uh yeah. It's great until your car gets pwned.
Egon @ Dec 1st 2007 6:39PM
So when you crash, does the Blue Screen of Death pop up? Hyuck!
RP @ Dec 1st 2007 9:26PM
I don't have much confidence in BMW ever since they invented iDrive.
Isn't there already a simpler protocol called CAN that is already in use in many cars? Seems like CAN would already be dirt-cheap. It's fault-tolerant, can run at 1 Mbps, and supports multiple-device arbitration with >100 devices. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controller_Area_Network
and http://hem.bredband.net/stafni/developer/CAN.htm
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater @ Dec 2nd 2007 5:53PM
BMW already uses CANbus in their cars and motorcycles.
Using IP as the network layer protocol would be a great idea, IMHO, it would save on weight and cost as wiring could be made simpler. Additionally, it would conceivably make adding and integrating new features to cars easier.
My question is though, would availability to stuff like the engine/trans management computers be available (as it is via OBDII/VAG-COM)?
vkchu @ Dec 1st 2007 10:58PM
commence h@x0r!n9 !!!
Rob @ Dec 1st 2007 11:16PM
About what I'd expect to see from good old fashioned German over-engineering. I wonder if my Lotus has any internet technologies built in. I'll check the manual.
paul34 @ Dec 1st 2007 11:42PM
Ahh, looks like some good old engineering common sense took over.
*Someone* finally thought - hey, why don't we just use a relatively open, already proven reliable method of inter-systems communications that's always under scrutiny by many people rather than spending thousands of dollars and lots of man-hours trying to develop our own reliable system?
Sounds good to me! Anything to make the complex dance that is making complex systems talk to each other effectively more standard and more reliable. In critical areas like certain car systems, failure is actually not an option.
Bob-o @ Dec 2nd 2007 1:05AM
The point of TCP/IP is load balancing, so there are multiple possible paths between two destinations. So you split your data into packets, send them out into the world, and eventually they get to the same place...maybe not in the correct order, but the senders/receivers can figure that out.
Now tell me, why is this necessary in car?
Wintrode @ Dec 2nd 2007 1:38AM
The point of TCP/IP is not load balancing, it is redundancy and recoverability. If a node fails, the network learns the next best path to get the data there (this really falls under dynamic routing protocols, but whatever). it was designed to standardize inter-system communications across numerous manufacturers. It accomplishes this through encapsulation and a layered model. TCP/IP is a 4 layer model consisting of (from the bottom up) Network Access, Internet, Transport, and Application. The point is that each layer could care less what the layer above or below it is doing with the data, as long as it gets it in a format it can handle, and can pass it along up/down the chain.
And how is IPv6 so much better than IPv4 for this application? The big thing with IPv6 is that we are running out of public IP addresses, so with IPv6 the address space has been expanded from ~4.3x10^9 to 3.4x10^38. Sure there are other advantages but none of these will be of benefit here. Even the addressing is bunk in this case unless all the components of your car-net are connecting to the public Internet.
PandaBear @ Dec 2nd 2007 2:04AM
It is pointless to run IP in a car unless it is entertainment system.
IP is hardware independent and have standardized software support, so it is cheap to develop for large compatibility. However, it is not a physical or even media access layer protocol so you still need something underneath to work. It adds overhead that cost money, well, may not be much for a $40k car, but still, there are more things that can go wrong but nothing in terms of benefit for real time system. It is simply overkill for low bandwidth, low latency, real time system that has single connection or low/no routing.
You still need to run it over a CAN bus, which is fault tolerant and collision prove. Unless they want to route entertainment between the front and back, or to provide in car wifi, there is no point.
It would not be safe to use it to connect ECU and other controllers, CAN is still needed.
John @ Dec 2nd 2007 5:48AM
another prime example of how TOO complicated cars have gotten.
whatever happened to simple = better? cars from the 70s are still being driven and older cars are easy to get running again. These Ipods and intarwebs on wheels won't be around in 20 years much less have any chance of being restored (not that anyone would want to restore one).
though I guess it proves to keep the market competitive, but I see no other need for this kind of complexity.