View Issue Details

Jump to NotesJump to History
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
000860230120: IO-LinkDocumentation Erratapublic2023-01-13 10:142024-02-16 09:38
ReporterMartin Lang Assigned ToDeepak Yadav  
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityhave not tried
Status resolvedResolutionfixed 
Target VersionV1.01 
Summary0008602: “Device not instantiated” clarify description
Description

Description from state “Device not instantiated” not clear enough. What can the client expects, how shall the server handle it?

  • Indicates implicit that the optional Device Object childs does not exists anymore?
  • Shall the Alarm Nodes also response with Bad_NodeIdDoesNotExists?
  • Is this OPC UA common sense?
  • How handle other CS this case?
TagsNo tags attached.

Relationships

related to 0007416 confirmedDeepak Yadav Support for IO Link Wireless Extensions 

Activities

Joachim Uffelmann

2023-03-08 08:41

developer   ~0018837

I am not sure if it is an IO-Link issue. Is it the issue of the structure of the mapping in OPC UA?
Independant of the communication technology.

Martin Lang

2023-03-10 14:18

manager   ~0018855

Indicates implicit that the optional Device Object childs does not exists anymore?
-> Yes, all child nodes shall not accessible anymore.
Shall the Alarm Nodes also response with Bad_NodeIdDoesNotExists?
-> All nodes shall not accessible, so the statuscode shall be BadNodeIdUnknown.

@Deepak
Extend CS text
“Device not instantiated” indicates that the optional Device Object does not exist. --> “Device not instantiated” indicates that the optional Device Object and its child nodes does not exist.

Martin Lang

2023-03-10 14:19

manager   ~0018856

please see last comment.

Deepak Yadav

2023-11-22 23:49

developer   ~0020399

Last edited: 2023-11-23 12:17

Updated the working version : OPC 30120 - UA Companion Specification for IO-Link 1.01.00 Draft V00.02 with the above CS text. However, the alarm node behavior changes are unclear

Martin Lang

2024-02-16 09:38

manager   ~0020826

"However, the alarm node behavior changes are unclear" -> WG decision is not to mention the alarm nodes explixit, since these are child nodes from the Device object too.

Martin Lang

2024-02-16 09:38

manager   ~0020827

WG review ok.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2023-01-13 10:14 Martin Lang New Issue
2023-02-10 17:02 Martin Lang Relationship added related to 0007416
2023-02-10 18:47 Martin Lang Target Version => V1.01
2023-02-22 07:41 Martin Lang Assigned To => Joachim Uffelmann
2023-02-22 07:41 Martin Lang Status new => assigned
2023-03-08 08:41 Joachim Uffelmann Assigned To Joachim Uffelmann => Martin Lang
2023-03-08 08:41 Joachim Uffelmann Status assigned => feedback
2023-03-08 08:41 Joachim Uffelmann Note Added: 0018837
2023-03-10 14:18 Martin Lang Note Added: 0018855
2023-03-10 14:19 Martin Lang Assigned To Martin Lang => Deepak Yadav
2023-03-10 14:19 Martin Lang Status feedback => assigned
2023-03-10 14:19 Martin Lang Note Added: 0018856
2023-11-22 23:49 Deepak Yadav Note Added: 0020399
2023-11-23 12:17 Deepak Yadav Note Edited: 0020399
2024-02-14 10:52 Deepak Yadav Status assigned => feedback
2024-02-16 09:38 Martin Lang Note Added: 0020826
2024-02-16 09:38 Martin Lang Status feedback => assigned
2024-02-16 09:38 Martin Lang Status assigned => resolved
2024-02-16 09:38 Martin Lang Resolution open => fixed
2024-02-16 09:38 Martin Lang Note Added: 0020827