Ethernet IP Guideline
Ethernet IP Guideline
Ethernet IP Guideline
Version 2.00
January 28, 2005
Published by
ODVA
General Recommendations for EtherNet/IP Developers
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Document Organization ................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Companion Documents.................................................................................................. 3
2 Technology Overview ............................................................................................................. 4
2.1 Overview of TCP/IP....................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Overview of EtherNet/IP ............................................................................................... 6
2.2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6
2.2.2 Device Applications................................................................................................... 6
2.2.3 Architectural Design.................................................................................................. 7
2.2.4 Network Topology..................................................................................................... 7
2.2.5 EtherNet/IP Transmission Types ............................................................................... 8
2.2.6 EtherNet/IP Device Classes ....................................................................................... 9
2.3 Levels of Communication ............................................................................................ 10
2.3.1 Categories of Control Network Messages ............................................................... 10
2.3.2 Quality of Service .................................................................................................... 12
2.3.3 Quality of Service Relationships ............................................................................. 14
2.3.4 How do we decide if Ethernet is the right network?................................................ 17
3 Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 20
3.1 Recommendations for Physical Layer Components .................................................... 20
3.1.1 Controller Chips ...................................................................................................... 20
3.1.2 Magnetics................................................................................................................. 21
3.1.3 Protection Circuitry ................................................................................................. 21
3.1.4 Connectors (Jacks and Plugs) .................................................................................. 23
3.1.5 Cables ...................................................................................................................... 23
3.1.6 Device Design (Physical Layer) .............................................................................. 23
3.2 Recommendations for TCP/IP Stack ........................................................................... 28
3.2.1 TCP/IP Stack Recommendations for All EtherNet/IP Devices ............................... 28
3.2.2 TCP/IP Stack Recommendations for EtherNet/IP Scanners.................................... 28
3.3 Recommendations for Operating System..................................................................... 29
3.4 Processor Recommendations ....................................................................................... 29
3.5 EtherNet/IP Protocol Stacks......................................................................................... 29
4 Organizational Support.......................................................................................................... 30
4.1 JSIGs ............................................................................................................................ 30
4.2 Enabler Technologies................................................................................................... 31
4.3 EtherNet/IP Implementors Workshop.......................................................................... 31
4.3.1 EtherNet/IP Recommendations Papers.................................................................... 31
4.3.2 EtherNet/IP Plug Fests............................................................................................. 32
4.3.3 North American and European Tours...................................................................... 32
5 Terms and Definitions ........................................................................................................... 33
1 Introduction
Interest in networking continues to grow rapidly as more companies and industries move their
products and services to the Internet. Within the office environment, Ethernet is the most popular
medium for connecting computers to each other and the Internet. This growing interest has not
been lost on the industrial communications industry. There have been increasing inquiries from
vendors, OEMs and end users about using Ethernet as the communication network for factory
floor control.
For devices to converse and interoperate over Ethernet (or any network), a common application
layer is needed. Although common protocols for file transfer (FTP), e-mail (SMTP), World Wide
Web (HTTP) and others have been established for several applications, the situation is not so
simple in the area of industrial automation. Each vendor of automation equipment that runs over
Ethernet TCP/IP has implemented its own application layer. They each speak a different
language. As a result, a standard application layer with common object models and universal
device profiles, doesn’t exist. Ethernet users are currently tied to proprietary solutions and aren’t
able to benefit from the best-in-class and best-in-value options offered by an open market.
EtherNet/IP, which is based on TCP/IP and UDP/IP protocols, fills the void by delivering
interoperable Ethernet products. This is possible because EtherNet/IP uses a proven and open
application layer standard. An independent EtherNet/IP conformance test labs has been
established to promote conformance to the specification and promote multi-vendor
interoperability.
The benefits of bringing EtherNet/IP to the plant floor are reduced cost, ease of integration and
the intriguing idea of building Internet features into factory automation equipment.
The ODVA (http://www.ODVA.org) and ControlNet International (http://www.ControlNet.org)
recognize the interest and potential of implementing existing fieldbus protocols on top of
Ethernet. They have taken the joint initiative to identify best practices and methods for
implementing the DeviceNet/ControlNet application layer protocols over a TCP/IP network. One
of the results of this effort has been the development of EtherNet/IP, an industrial automation
protocol based on CIP (Common Industrial Protocol) which is used in both DeviceNet and
ControlNet. EtherNet/IP is defined as CIP operating on top of the TCP/IP protocol suite on
Ethernet. Another result of the initiative is the publication of papers to assist vendors and end
users in the development and use of EtherNet/IP products.
This paper provides recommendations to vendors interested in developing EtherNet/IP products
for the industrial control markets. The recommendations are intended to help vendors develop
EtherNet/IP products that best meet the needs of end users. Many of these recommendations are
based on experiences from early adopters and EtherNet/IP technology inventors.
• Overview of the Technology - This section provides an overview of Ethernet, TCP/IP, and
EtherNet/IP and discusses its use in industrial control applications. The following items are
covered in this section:
- Overview of TCP/IP - A brief discussion of the TCP/IP suite.
- Overview of EtherNet/IP - A brief discussion of the EtherNet/IP protocol.
- Ethernet and TCP/IP in Industrial Control Applications - A look at the
applicability of Ethernet and TCP/IP to industrial control applications.
- Levels of Communication - A discussion of the requirements of communication for
industrial control and relates these to Ethernet, TCP/IP, and EtherNet/IP.
• Organizational Support - This section discusses the roles that the various organizations and
SIGs play in the support of EtherNet/IP.
• Terms and Definitions - This section provides a glossary for terms used when discussing
EtherNet/IP and CIP.
Implementors Workshop documents can be found on the ODVA web site (www.odva.org), under
EtherNet/IP Papers and Presentations.
Recommended Functionality for EtherNet/IP Devices, Version 1.0, June 10, 2004.
This document recommends functionality related to the EtherNet/IP protocol
implementation in EtherNet/IP devices. The recommendations are being made to help
promote interoperability between devices and provide a minimum level of capability
required for user applications.
Recommended IP Addressing Methods for EtherNet/IP Devices, Version 1.0, June 10 2003.
This document recommends common mechanisms related to IP address assignment and
management for EtherNet/IP devices.
IPv4 Address Conflict Detection for EtherNet/IP Devices, Version 1.0, July 27 2004.
This document specifies a common mechanism by which EtherNet/IP devices can detect
IP address conflicts (commonly referred to as “duplicate IP addresses”).
Performance Terminology for EtherNet/IP Devices, Version 1.0, September 16, 2004.
This document discusses and defines a number of terms that are used in describing
performance tests and the results for EtherNet/IP devices.
Recommended Operation for Switches Running Relay Agent and Option 82.
This document details the DHCP Option 82 process and provides guidance for switch
vendors to provide a design compatible with the EtherNet/IP protocol.
The following documents are in development in the workshop and will be released at a
later date.
2 Technology Overview
The following diagram illustrates the stack concept. Notice how the Common Industrial Protocol
(CIP) straddles both UDP and TCP. Most high level protocols are stacked on top of either TCP
or UDP. CIP uses both UDP and TCP for conveying implicit and explicit CIP messages.
Explicit messages use TCP to pass one time messages and commands from one node to another.
Implicit messages use UDP for control messages.
Transport
TCP UDP
OSPF IGMP
ICMP
IGRP
Network
ARP IP RARP
Further information on TCP/IP can be found at the Internet Engineering Task Force web site:
http://www.ietf.org
2.2.1 Introduction
Ethernet Industrial Protocol (EtherNet/IP) is an open industrial networking standard that supports
real-time I/O messaging, explicit message exchange or both and uses commercial off-the-shelf
Ethernet communication chips and physical media. Using Ethernet products is not only a
common trend in technology today but provides users the ability to access device-level data all
the way from the Internet. EtherNet/IP emerged due to the high demand for using the Ethernet
network for control applications.
Because Ethernet technology and standard protocol suites such as TCP/IP have been published
for public use, standardized software tools and physical media have been mass-produced and are
readily available offering two benefits: known technology and accessibility. To make
EtherNet/IP successful, CIP has been added on top of TCP/UDP/IP to provide a common
application layer. Therefore, when selecting an EtherNet/IP product, you are choosing a product
with CIP capabilities. Additionally, EtherNet/IP uses the producer/consumer network model, as
do DeviceNet and ControlNet networks. With the introduction of Ethernet switch technology and
full-duplex data transmission, the occurrence of data collisions is theoretically eliminated, and
performance is drastically enhanced on an EtherNet/IP network.
encapsulation
Transport DeviceNet ControlNet
and Data Link DLL DLL UPD TCP Future
Layer Transport Transport
IP
ATM, Firewire
USB, Blue Tooth
Ethernet is designed to handle large amounts of messaging data, 1500 bytes maximum per packet.
In addition to handling large amounts of data, the Ethernet speed (10/100M bit/s) makes that data
transmission even more appealing. Because of the wide acceptance of Ethernet technology
throughout the years, the cost per node for Ethernet switches and other Ethernet physical media is
rapidly decreasing. With these characteristics, Ethernet is becoming a viable choice for many
control applications.
The Ethernet cabling components provide flexibility in two areas: overall cost and manufacturer.
Due to the large number of third-party vendors, there is a wide selection of media components
and cost considerations. When building a network, people may use many of the following
components: cabling, transceivers, hubs, repeaters, routers, and switches.
Standard twisted-pair and fiber-optic cables are fully functional with Ethernet. Depending on the
environment, people should consider products that have been proven for industrial applications.
Depending upon the network configuration, an Ethernet hub or switch is appropriate. A hub is an
inexpensive connectivity method that provides an easy method of connecting devices on
information networks (shared Ethernet). A switch reduces collisions and is recommended for
real-time control installations (switched Ethernet). Routers are used to isolate control data traffic
from other types of office data traffic, to isolate information traffic on the plant floor from control
traffic on the plant floor, and for security purposes, i.e., firewalls. Repeaters extend the overall
network cable length. They can also connect networks with different media types.
• Information. Non-time critical data transfers — typically large packet size. Information data
exchanges are short-lived explicit connections between one originator and one target device.
Information data packets use the TCP/IP protocol and take advantage of the TCP data
handling features.
• I/O Data. Time-critical data transfers — typically smaller packet size. I/O data exchanges are
long-term implicit connections between one originator and any number of target devices. I/O
data packets use the UDP/IP protocols and take advantage of high-speed throughput
capability of UDP.
ETHERNET/IP
TRANSMISSION MESSAGE TYPE DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE
TYPES
Read / Write
Non-time-critical
Information Explicit data via message
Information Data
instruction
Control real-time
Real-time I/O
I/O Data Implicit data from a
Data
remote I/O device
Explicit Message Client Capable of both answering and sending explicit requests.
Adapter Explicit message client and server capability plus I/O connection
target.
Scanner Explicit message client and server, and both target and originator of
I/O connections.
Control messages include the reading of inputs and writing of outputs. Diagnostic messages
perform functions such as reading a detected fault value and silencing alarms. Configuration
messages often occur while machines are running, to change gains and so forth, but are not
performed as often as control messages. Lastly, information and identification messages occur on
demand at intervals much greater than the other two message types.
For example, a recipe that is conveyed to a batch metering system need only be delivered prior to
its usage. Once the recipe is used, the actual amount of ingredients used in the current batch must
be saved to an inventory control system. As long as the actual amounts are conveyed before the
next batch is started the requirements are met. The intervals between these types of messages are
generally measured in minutes. In fact, loss of this information during delivery, although highly
undesirable, does not directly affect the quality of the product just manufactured. Additionally,
the interval between a retry does not matter, as long as the information is not lost.
Due to the non-deterministic and intermittent nature of these messages, as well as the widely
varying content of these messages, existing TCP/IP protocols easily convey this category of
messages.
Later discussions will illustrate the relative importance of the Quality of Service criteria based
upon the type of information being conveyed.
All networks and communicating devices have a finite amount of bandwidth, where the amount
of messages presented will eventually saturate the media or the CPU within the devices. When
system tradeoffs are required, the relative importance of the various Quality of Service attributes
shall be made using the following criteria.
2.3.2.1 Determinism
In control networks, determinism is the ability to guarantee delivery of messages to the
application within a specified period of time or else a fault action shall occur. The application
being controlled will ideally determine the fault duration, although default values are generally
used. Given a limited amount of network and CPU bandwidth, delivery of control messages (I/O)
takes precedence over all other message types since they affect the quality of the process being
controlled. Determinism is less important for diagnostics and the least important for information
messages.
Failure to respond within the required interval may either damage the machine and/or process or
result in less than desirable product quality. Generally, diagnostic and configuration messages
are less critical, and information messages are the lowest priority.
Although the control loop can be broken into infinitely finer granularity, this document shall
focus on the prior general message categories and Quality of Service message behaviors.
The meaning of the vertical axis changes with each category of message and was described in the
prior sections. The various plots are general relationships, the values of which are application
specific, and are solely intended to provide a relative measurement in a control network.
% nodes sending
Response time
low
Control Diagnostic/Configuration
Information
Figure 3 Message Categories Versus Quality of Service
It should be apparent that control networks historically were optimized to support the far-left side
of the messages shown in Figure 3. Information networks historically were optimized to support
the far right side. The middle portion of the figure was historically achieved with “point to
point” protocols. Today the improved network and CPU implementation technologies are
allowing the convergence of all the features onto the same network. DeviceNet, ControlNet, and
EtherNet/IP are individual examples of this convergence. In effect, the requirements have
changed little over the past twenty years. The only change has been the availability of affordable
technologies to meet these requirements without custom implementations.
As history shows, networks can be easily constructed by limiting the requirements to those that
are easily achieved given a specified technology. EtherNet/IP has specified an available set of
open technologies and attempts to meet all existing requirements. As is always the case, attempts
to achieve the far-left side of the requirements shall have consequences on system configurations.
An ideal change of state control system would only convey data when it has changed or prior to a
fault action occurring at a consuming node. When the implementation technology has a limited
“wire bandwidth”, health indications may be provided by sending null (zero data byte) messages
if control data has not changed, or sending control data messages immediately upon detection of a
relevant change. Receipt of a null control data message may not result in execution of the
associated control algorithm and production of the resulting output message. Since Ethernet's
minimum packet sizes are so large, the only reason a null message would be sent would be to
eliminate the CPU control algorithm execution time and associated control output message
production when control data has not changed. Existing network standards, like the TCP/IP suite
do not include this functionality within their scope of requirements. The common methods of
achieving these requirements are among some of the items specified within EtherNet/IP and CIP.
From an implementation perspective, within many control devices, the processing of a control
message shall preempt the processing of any of the other message categories. The application
layer for control messages is often analogous to directly reading and writing memory locations,
where output actions occur immediately upon writing the received value to memory. Bottom
line, interpretation of message protocols is reduced to its lowest common denominator to
minimize delays. Most commercially available TCP/IP stacks do not provide expedient action of
selected UDP/IP messages versus TCP/IP messages. This is a key differentiator of commercially
available TCP/IP stacks.
The existing TCP/IP stacks rely entirely on the Ethernet access mechanisms to detect collisions,
back off, and retransmit messages. This often becomes a discussion topic relative to
determinism. As discussed earlier, this only becomes an issue when fault actions occur due to
lack of control message delivery after a defined interval of time. In many applications, like
general process control, the fault actions’ duration is so large that this will rarely, if ever, become
an issue.
A low rate of Ethernet packet collisions will allow a higher level of determinism. Some Ethernet
protocols rely on low traffic density to minimize collisions, but they sacrifice determinism in their
worst cases. A simple collision avoidance technique is used in many traditional master/slave
“scanners”. Programmable controllers, present in many manufacturing plants today, employ a
master/slave scanner to write and read I/O data. A single client controller sends output data to a
node. The node replies with its input data. Upon receipt of the input response, the client
controller sends output data to the next node in its scan list. This continues until all I/O nodes
have been updated. The “polling” process repeats continuously while the controller is running.
(Other collision avoidance techniques exist.) In a master/slave system, polled I/O nodes only
speak when they are spoken to, only 1 master can speak on the network at a given time. The
result is that collisions NEVER occur! Using this simple system configuration, subnet utilization
is solely limited by the time it takes the I/O node to service the output message produced by the
client controller and start producing its input response message.
This type of system is totally deterministic, especially if the maximum delay that each I/O node
may take to start its response can be determined. The “scan interval” is merely the sum of the
update intervals of all the I/O nodes and generally includes some additional time for information
and diagnostic messages after the I/O scan. Bottom line, techniques are available to solve all of
the message delivery issues previously discussed as long as a customer limits the types of nodes
connected to a subnet. The extremely simple master/slave solution does NOT allow more than
one client to transmit on the control subnet, nor does it allow office type communications like
surfing the web! A robust solution may provide methods of: identifying a new node, identifying
when a node may participate on the physical medium, and enabling it’s a node’s communications
assuming it meets the criteria established for a given machine application. EtherNet/IP may
specify various system behaviors and associated mechanisms as time goes on.
1
Source: Measured Capacity of an Ethernet: Myths and Reality, David R. Boggs, Jeffrey C. Mogul and Christopher A. Kent,
September 1988, http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/WRL-88-4.pdf
2
Source: Technical Report – Issues in LAN Switching and Migration from a shared LAN Environment, Rich Seifert, November
1995, http://www.ethermanage.com/ethernet/pdf/techrept14.pdf
However, as already mention, in many cases, the situation has changed since the two quoted
investigation were done. Three aspects have to be considered:
1. The processing power that can be available in Ethernet hosts has increased dramatically
since then. There are products available by now that can operate at message rates of
20,000 messages per second and beyond. However, most devices have less processing
power with some of them being able to support only a few hundred Ethernet frames per
second. If message throughput is to be increased, increased processing power should be
considered or other measures are needed to improve the situation.
2. Many applications now use switches instead of hubs. This change improves the situation
dramatically since this means a node will only see those messages directed at its MAC
address, not all the messages in the segment. Once this is done, a rate of a few hundred
messages per second may already be good enough for many applications. However, once
I/O multicast traffic is used, the situation changes once again: Simple switches translate
multicast frames into broadcasts and all frames will again appear on all ports of the
switch. It is therefore mandatory to use more intelligent switches (with IGMP snooping)
to avoid overload conditions when multicast traffic is present.
3. While 10 Mbps systems are still very common today, the general trend goes toward 100
Mbps systems. When looking at the theoretical considerations above, this seems to make
things worse, but in reality it improves the situation by reducing the influence of the
transmission system. A 10 Mbps hub-based system that is regarded as congested with a
20% utilization would only have a 2% utilization if run at 100 Mbps and would not be
regarded as congested any more. Therefore, in a 100 Mbps system using switches, it is
the typically the throughput of the scanner devices (this node sees all the I/O traffic) that
limits system performance.
As should be apparent from the prior network loading discussion, when it comes to a network’s
speed, baud rate is only one of the factors to consider. The network communication model used
to exchange control data and information between devices actually has a significant impact on
network functionality, which is especially important on an Ethernet network. All networks fall
into one of two categories: Source/Destination or Producer/Consumer. The difference between
the two can be best conveyed by a human analogy. Assume one needs to tell a room full of
people the time of day. With source/destination, one person reads a clock and then proceeds to
individually tell each person in the room the time. In producer/consumer mode, the same person
announces the time to everyone at once and everyone can consume it at the same time. In a
Producer/Consumer environment, “identifiers” embedded into each message are used by the
devices to determine which messages they should “consume.” Although the network model does
not impact the rate at which data is transmitted, it does affect how efficiently the available
bandwidth is used. It uses less bandwidth because a producer/consumer network transmits a
piece of information only once. Less bandwidth equates to greater efficiency and overall speed.
EtherNet/IP, ControlNet, DeviceNet, and Foundation Fieldbus are examples of networks based on
the Producer/Consumer technology.
3 Recommendations
This section provides recommendations to vendors interested in developing EtherNet/IP products
for the industrial control markets. The recommendations are intended to help vendors develop
EtherNet/IP products that best meet the needs of end users. Many of these recommendations are
based on experiences from early adopters and EtherNet/IP technology inventors.
Note that this paper will not identify specific brands or vendors in its recommendations. The
purpose of the document is to provide a list of recommended features and functions that a
developer should be aware of when selecting products to be used with their EtherNet/IP
implementation.
3.1.2 Magnetics
Magnetics play an important role in providing isolation for the device from the cable plant. Any
one of the components in the network will set the entire network performance. In addition to
isolation, the transformer must provide as high common mode rejection (CMR) as possible. Most
transformers only supply 30 dB to 40 dB at 0-30 MHz. Developers are strongly encouraged to
use transformers with a minimum of 59 dB at 30 MHz. Pulse Engineering makes an example of
this type of transformer (H1112 and H1126.) One known drawback is the common mode chokes
may cause problems for transceivers that perform auto-crossover wiring detection. Some
transceivers will produce distorted signals when the common mode choke is on the transceiver
side of the transformer.
• If there is a need to clamp common mode and differential mode noises, the clamp
circuitry should be placed between the transformer and the transceiver. Reference Figure
4.
• If there is a need to only clamp the differential voltages on the pairs, then the clamp
circuitry can be placed between the connector and the transformer. Reference Figure 5.
TX+
Ethernet 10/
100
Transmitter
TX-
Harris 75 Ohm
V30MLA1812TX1884
1nF
Harris 75 Ohm
V30MLA1812TX1884
Ethernet 10/100
Receiver
RX-
TX-
Harris 75 Ohm
V30MLA1812TX1884
1nF
Harris
75 Ohm
V30MLA1812TX1884
Transient Protection
SEMTECH SLVU2.8-4
RX+
Ethernet 10/100
Receiver
RX-
Magnetics
60dB CMRR
• Contacts must be designed to withstand the high vibration and shock found on the factory
floor. This vibration is typically 2 to 10 Gs.
• Temperature ranges from –10 to +85 degrees C. The plastics must be selected to
withstand the high temperatures.
• Gold contacts are required to prevent corrosion in caustic environments.
• The gold and under-plating must be robust enough to survive vibration and repeated
insertion and removals of the connectors.
• Sealing for the connector. There may be several connectors introduced in the next few
months that attempt to solve the sealing issues. Selecting connectors other than the RJ-45
(sealed or unsealed) puts the responsibility on the designer to make sure the connector
meets the stringent fast Ethernet specifications from an electrical performance
perspective.
Approved industrial connectors include a sealed RJ45 IEC61076-106-3 Variant 01 and a M12-4
IEC 61076-101. Approved connector descriptions are in the EtherNet/IP specification, Volume
2, Chapter 8, Sections 8-5.1.4, 8-6.2.3, and 8-6.3.1.
3.1.5 Cables
Cable performance is the most important contributor to the overall performance the industrial
Ethernet network. Placement of the cable in the system is equally as important. System and/or
cable designers are strongly encouraged to consult the EtherNet/IP specification for selection and
design of cables to be used in an industrial control application. The use of standard off the shelf
cables may cause system malfunction or degradation. For proper installation and grounding
methods are described in the EtherNet/IP Installation Guide.
Use either CAT6 or shielded twisted pair (STP) cables in high noise environments.
3.1.6.1 Temperature/Humidity
Select components that will survive the temperature and humidity of the environment. For
example, the magnetics must meet the attenuation specification over the extended temperature
range.
3.1.6.4 Grounding
Grounding of the shield and protective devices is critical in surviving the high noise/voltage
environmental tests. Further grounding of the shield in STP cables is important from a system
perspective. Ground loops in the shield will cause noise to be coupled into the communications
pairs. The shield termination recommendations are covered later in this section. Shield
termination practices are an integral part of the EtherNet/IP specification.
3.1.6.5 Isolation
From a safety and reliability perspective, isolation from the network and device power supply is
very important. Virtually all Ethernet transformers are only rated at 1500V. Most industrial
testing requires a minimum of 2KV. There can be enough energy that crosses from the network
side into the transceiver side of the transformer to cause failure and present a safety hazard. The
routing of conductors and bypass capacitor placement in the design can impact the isolation.
Placing a bypass capacitor between Earth ground and digital ground can couple noise to and from
the logic section of your design and is not advisable.
Option 1
Option 1 should only be used when connecting two commercially off the shelf devices (Switch
and NIC) together in a network. Any connectivity device such as Hub, Switch or Router that uses
shielded RJ-45 jacks, will have a direct connection to earth either through the power plug or
separate ground lug. This ground connection provides the single point of ground and should not
be defeated. The device end should be isolated by not terminating the shield in the RJ-45 plug.
The figure below is an example of how the single point termination can be implemented in the
patch cord.
1 1
2 2
3 3
Connector 4 4 Connector
Switch 5 5 Device
6 6
7 7
8 8
Option 2
Option 2 should be used in the design of all EtherNet/IP devices. This provides a single point DC
ground at the connectivity device and an AC ground at the EtherNet/IP device. The shield is
terminated at the EtherNet/IP device to earth ground through a parallel RC. The values of the
termination circuit are .01uF/500V (min) capacitor and 1 meg Ohm ¼ watt resistor. To protect
the capacitor, a MOV should be placed in parallel with the RC. The part number of the MOV is
provided in the figures below.
Device
Termination
RJ45
.01 µF 1MOhn
Shield
10/100 Mb
Harris
500V
V30MLA1812T Ethernet
X1884
Switch
RJ45
Shield
.01 µF 1MOhm
500V Harris
V30MLA1812T
X1884
3.1.6.7 Layout
Layout is critical for noise hardening. High frequency devices should be isolated from the
physical layer area. Clock lines should be terminated and routed away from the physical layer
area. Likewise, never route earth ground or physical layer traces into or over digital areas. The
digital ground plane and power planes should not extend into the physical layer area. The figure
below provides an example layout. Circuit traces connecting the RJ-45 and transformers should
be treated as transmission lines. This requires that the characteristic impedance be matched and
constant.
2mm [0.08in]
Optional
0.01µF/500V
1 M 1/4W
Earth
Power Ground
Planes
RJ-45
PHY
Chip
LED
LED
The operating system selection also depends on the application. Most low-end Adapter class
devices will not require a high level OS, and may get by with a small kernel. Higher end devices
which perform control and scanner functionality will require correspondingly higher level
operating systems.
It is helpful if the OS provides the means to monitor run-time operation during development so
that developers may analyze their application. Developers will want to be able to see CPU idle
time, distribution of CPU time over the different application tasks, memory usage and interrupt
performance. The monitor should be capable of being removed or disabled for the final
application build.
Many processors are available with on-chip Ethernet controllers. If selecting a processor with an
on-chip Ethernet controller, the controller features outlined in the Controller Chips section above
should be considered when making the selection.
Many TCP/IP stacks have suggested processor and resource sizing. Follow these
recommendations and add for the level of application.
ODVA (www.odva.org) provides a freeware EtherNet/IP stack that may be used as a reference
for a developer implementing EtherNet/IP. The freeware provides source code for an Adapter
class device with minimal functionality.
4 Organizational Support
ODVA and ControlNet International will co-manage the EtherNet/IP specification including all
enhancements.
ODVA is an independent organization of users, vendors, and distributors to support the
worldwide growth of DeviceNet by assisting with tools, training, compliance testing and
marketing activities. ODVA operates globally with offices in Europe, North America and
Australia and affiliates in Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. DeviceNet is an
open communications network designed to connect factory floor devices, such as sensors, push
buttons, motor starters and drives, to control systems.
ControlNet International is an independent organization for users and vendors of ControlNet
products. ControlNet is a real-time, control-layer network providing for high-speed transport of
both time-critical I/O and messaging data, including upload/download of programming and
configuration data and peer-to-peer messaging on a single or redundant, intrinsically safe physical
media link. Deterministic and repeatable, ControlNet’s high-speed control and data capabilities
significantly enhance I/O performance and peer-to-peer communications.
4.1 JSIGs
Joint Special Interest Groups (JSIG) comprised of ODVA and CI members have been formed to
develop and manage other aspects of EtherNet/IP technology including EtherNet/IP conformance
tests, enabler products and end-user educational materials. The following JSIGs are currently
active.
EtherNet/IP Physical Layer Develops and maintain specifications for Physical Layer
components for use in Industrial EtherNet/IP
applications.
EtherNet/IP Infrastructure
Develops and publishes information to assist in
Recommendations Task Group
infrastructure design for EtherNet/IP network
architecture.
The Enabler technologies are posted on the ODVA web site at (www.odva.org). They are
available for developers to download free of charge.
ODVA and ControlNet International will support the adoption of EtherNet/IP by providing
training classes, trade show presence, technical support, developer tools, speakers bureaus, white
papers, and a conformance test suite.
I/O Client Function that uses the I/O messaging services of another
(I/O Server) device to perform a task. Initiates a request for
an I/O message to the server module. The I/O Client is a
Connection Originator
Scanner Class A Scanner Class product exchanges real-time I/O data with
Adapter Class and Scanner Class products. This type of
node can respond to connection requests and can also
initiate connections on its own.