Fieldbus & Industrial Networking


FRNT0, layer 2 network redundancy protocol

May 2006 Fieldbus & Industrial Networking

The Westermo On Time industrial managed switch series is available with redundant ring technology. This eliminates network failure caused by fibre or copper failures on the trunk ports (ring ports). The speed of ring recovery is an essential part of designing a network. The Westermo OnTime FRNT (fast re-configuration of network topology) version 0 protocol can recover from a failure in only 20 ms if such a failure does occur. When used in conjunction with redundant power supplies a very reliable system can be designed.

Standard Ethernet networks would collapse and fail if normal office-based Ethernet switches were formed into a complete ring. This failure is commonly referred to as a 'broadcast storm' as Ethernet Packets have multiple routes on a network to communicate to devices. Usually, an incorrect type of packet broadcasts (or floods) over a network and causes hosts to respond all at once, typically with wrong responses. This starts the process over and over again; hence the network crashes.

The FRNT0 is similar to the IEEE Spanning Tree Protocol (STP) except for the following: each switch in a ring topology has knowledge of the network topology, see Figure 1, ie, not only to its neighbouring switches as is the case for STP.

Figure 1
Figure 1

Event-based principle

An FRNT topology change event packet will be sent directly to the focal point switch in case of a topology change (eg, a link loss or a link establishment), while a STP implementation will only send STP control packets one network hop. The focal point switch will, based on the received topology change event packet from the topology change detecting switches, generate a topology change command. This packet is sent to each member switch in the ring. The time it takes from the occurrence of a topology change until the corresponding topology change event packet is received on the focal point is typically a fraction of a ms or a few ms at the most, even though the number of the switches in the ring is high.

200 switches in a ring

The FRNT0 concept contains in principle no limitation for the maximum number of FRNT0 enabled switches that can be installed in a single ring. The maximum number has been set to 200 switches.

20 ms re-configuration time

A large number of switches in a ring have only a small impact on the re-configuration time of the network topology. Example: 100 switches on the path between the topology change detecting switch and the focal point with a very high network load on the links (eg, 50% of full wire speed).

The switch latency in the no load scenario is 15 microseconds (µs), while a conservative estimate in case of 50% load is 70 microseconds (µs). This gives 3 ms round trip propagation delay in a no load scenario and 14 ms round trip propagation delay in the (conservative) high load scenario.

The most time consuming part in case of a topology change is MAC table update procedure. The MAC tables on each switch must be updated in case of a topology change. This operation takes approximately 10 ms. This gives a re-configuration time of approximately 20 ms.

Connection oriented protocol

The member to focal point communication is based on a connection oriented protocol. This means that the protocol will handle packet loss of FRNT control packets. Packet loss is very unlikely in a normal scenario due to the excellent bit error rate (BER) properties of wired Ethernet (copper or fibre), ie, BER should be better than 10-11. However, one must be able to handle a situation where a trunk link might suffer from poor BER with packet loss as a result. This connection oriented protocol is very fast. An FRNT control packet, generated by the member, will be re-sent after 30 ms if no acknowledgement is received from the focal point.

Full immunity vs any type of network load

The loss of FRNT packets due to a network overload situation is not an issue for the FRNT0 control protocol. Thus, any unicast-, multicast- or broadcast network load can be generated on the network without any FRNT0 packet loss. An overload situation in this context means that the interface to the switch CPU is a network bottleneck, ie, important control packets must compete vs other packet to the CPU. Broadcast load is for all practical purposes the most critical network load in this context. The FRNT0 protocol is, however, protected against such an overload scenario due to the following properties:

* Broadcast bandwidth limitation.

* Unique VLAN configuration for the FRNT control packets.

* FRNT packets defined as packet with highest possible QoS level.

Similar proprietary network redundant protocols from other vendors are in most cases based on polling instead of event controlled handling of a topology change. This will introduce a slower establishment of a new topology. The FRNT0 protocol is also based on polling as a supplementary function to the event-based part of the protocol. This function has only relevance in case of a multiple point of failure (single point of failure is handled by the of event controlled handling of a topology change).

Link qualification based on data link layer protocol, LHP

A major problem with most network redundancy protocols is the probability for having a network loop where a potential storm can be generated only in one direction (not both directions), and where this is not detected by the root (master) switch. This problem can only be handled if the switches support a link layer protocol that is used in order to qualify a link. The FRNT0 protocol has support for such a protocol. This Westermo OnTime protocol is referred to as the Link Health Protocol (LHP). The LHP makes sure that packets can be both sent and received on a trunk port before the link is properly qualified. This protocol is mandatory if the trunk ports are based on fibre.

FRNT0 main properties

* Event-based principle.

* 200 switches in a ring.

* 20 ms re-configuration time.

* Connection oriented protocol.

*p Full immunity vs any type of network load (uni- multi- and broadcast).

* Link qualification based on data link layer protocol, LHP.

For more information contact Throughput Technologies, 011 705 2497, [email protected]



Credit(s)



Share this article:
Share via emailShare via LinkedInPrint this page

Further reading:

Why secure industrial communication depends on deployment as well
Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
The Industrial Security Harmonisation Group has released a joint industry perspective highlighting a critical truth in industrial cybersecurity: secure communication is not determined by protocols alone, but by how they are deployed and managed in real-world environments.

Read more...
A single platform for all automation functions
Beckhoff Automation Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
The introduction of TwinCAT in 1996 marked a decisive evolutionary step for PC-based control. Today, the TwinCAT platform combines all automation functions in a strictly deterministic real-time environment, from PLC and motion control through CNC and measurement technology and beyond, to vision, robotics and pioneering AI tools.

Read more...
Loop signature Part 2-4: Feedforward Control: Part 3
Michael Brown Control Engineering Editor's Choice Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
In the previous articles in this series, the basic theory behind feedforward control was discussed, and it was also shown how to apply feedforward in practice. In this article, it will be shown how well feedforward can work in practice by giving a couple of examples.

Read more...
Control Station and Dimension Software partner to connect control performance monitoring with enterprise operations intelligence
Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
Control Station has entered into a strategic technology partnership with Dimension Software, a leading provider of industrial operations management platforms. The collaboration connects Control Station’s PlantESP control loop performance monitoring platform with Dimension Software’s Asset Intellect operations intelligence environment, enabling manufacturers to operationalise control performance insights across their organisations.

Read more...
PCIe digitiser cards for optimal GHz signal acquisition and analysis
Vepac Electronics Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
The addition of two new PCIe Digitiser cards from Spectrum Instrumentation extends the company’s flagship M5i series to deliver optimal GHz signal acquisition and analysis capabilities.

Read more...
Precise, synchronised control for automated steel mesh handling system
Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
Automation specialist Hambi Maschinenbau has developed a world-first system that automates the cutting, handling and stacking of heavy reinforcing steel mesh – a task that previously required up to six human operators.

Read more...
Loop signature Part 2-3: Feedforward Control: Part 2
Michael Brown Control Engineering Editor's Choice Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
Feedforward control tuning is not nearly as critical as feedback tuning, and fairly simple models are usually fine for the purpose in hand.

Read more...
Upgrading radiological surveillance systems in nuclear facilities
Omniflex Remote Monitoring Specialists Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
Nuclear plant operators face an uncomfortable reality. Many of the control and monitoring systems still in use today were never designed to support the full operational lifespan of the facilities they serve.

Read more...
Next-level CAN Software enables easy access to CAN XL
Industrial Data Xchange (IDX) Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
With the release of its PCAN-Explorer 7, PEAK delivers a major update that adds full support for CAN XL, multiple symbol files per connection, Python scripting and flexible licensing including floating licenses.

Read more...
Loop signature Part 2-2: Feedforward Control: Part 1
Michael Brown Control Engineering Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
Feedforward control is a powerful technique that can dramatically improve control variance in cases where load changes cause big deviations from setpoint and the actual process dynamics are too slow to allow the feedback controller to operate fast enough to catch these disturbances.

Read more...









While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein, the publisher and its agents cannot be held responsible for any errors contained, or any loss incurred as a result. Articles published do not necessarily reflect the views of the publishers. The editor reserves the right to alter or cut copy. Articles submitted are deemed to have been cleared for publication. Advertisements and company contact details are published as provided by the advertiser. Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or veracity of supplied material.




© Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd | All Rights Reserved