|
RDM General Implementation Discussion General Discussion and questions relating to implementing RDM in a product. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
September 19th, 2006 | #1 | |
Task Group Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 26
|
Checksum curiosa
The spec states that...
Quote:
Cheers, Shaun |
|
September 19th, 2006 | #2 |
Administrator
|
Shaun,
If I recall correctly the Message Length max is 255. That field points to the Slot # of Checksum High. So I believe the max packet is 257 bytes. If each of those bytes was 255, then the Checksum would be 65535. So in that case it wouldn't roll over. It would be best for everyone to implement it as a modulo anyway as there will be less problems when/if there is any expansion to it in the future.
__________________
Scott M. Blair RDM Protocol Forums Admin |
September 19th, 2006 | #3 |
Task Group Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 26
|
The 257 byte maximum includes the two bytes of the checksum, which clearly aren't covered by the checksum. The checksum only covers 255 bytes.
|
October 3rd, 2006 | #4 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4
|
Just because you can't get to the roll over point doesn't mean you can't say it's modulo. By it's very definition of being a 16-bit number it has to be modulo 0x10000
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Table 6-6 Checksum Example Error | prwatE120 | RDM Interpretation Questions | 1 | January 19th, 2007 07:49 PM |
Discovery Checksum Problem Analysis | nic123 | RDM General Implementation Discussion | 3 | September 24th, 2006 11:25 PM |