nmranet at Yahoo! Groups

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

David Harris — Sat, 09 Feb 2013 22:47:57 GMT

Hi Stuart and David --- Thanks for this query. It need to be taken over to the OpenLCB egroup for discussion. I will summarize and post there. David

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

otopiasoftware — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 18:33:29 GMT

I've not been through the documents in detail, but based on your comments I'll happily second it - just the sort of little detail that could cause future

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

David Harris — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 04:15:50 GMT

Busy, busy, busy .... will answer soonish. David

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

stuart_w_baker@... — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 03:34:04 GMT

I'm a little surprised that nobody has commented on this as of yet. As far as I can tell, there is a discrepancy here. Does anyone want to "second" this

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

stuart_w_baker@... — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:17:44 GMT

Jim, Jim, Looks like the latest version has it in section 2.9. Anyways, thanks for finding that for me, I didn't know this document existed until I did an SVN

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

Jim Kueneman — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:24:56 GMT

trunk/specs/drafts/GenMessageNetworkWN.pdf 2.8 Delays and Timeouts. Jim

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

stuart_w_baker@... — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:20:12 GMT

Jim, Could you help me find that guidance in the docs? I can't find it anywhere. BTW, it is quite common to specify timeout values (with some tolerance) in

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

Jim Kueneman — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:48:21 GMT

To me that just seems like good design practice and not necessarily a spec. How do you test for it? Somehow you would have to signal the outside world that

Re: Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group f

stuart_w_baker@... — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 14:51:06 GMT

In reviewing the Datagram documents, and contemplating the proper implementation in my software, I think I may have come across an ambiguity. The sending node

Final Draft Documents - Submitted to the NMRAnet Working Group for P

Alex Shepherd — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 12:51:32 GMT

Hi Guys, A number of previously In-Progress OpenLCB Documents have been received and processed by the NMRAnet Working Group and are now

Call to Review - Urgent

David Harris — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 05:43:28 GMT

Hi All --- We are hoping to present a package of Protocols to the NMRA Board in two weeks at their Winter Board Meeting. Would you please review the following

New Member

Michael — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 03:18:36 GMT

Hi all, I'd like to introduce myself as a new member of both the NMRAnet and OpenLCB groups. My interests are frankly commercial, since I work for a small

Additional OpenLCB Documents in Final Stages for NMRAnet adoption

Alex Shepherd — Sun, 30 Dec 2012 23:51:43 GMT

Hi Guys, Just to let you know, a number of new documents have been added to the In-Progress OpenLCB Documents list on our

Re: Hi!

David Baker — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:16:46 GMT

Hi again, My intetrest in NMRA net is based around the situation I face while working on my small modular layout. I like the way DCC enables all different

Re: Hi!

Don Goodman-Wilson — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:28:14 GMT

David, welcome! Tell us a bit about your interest in NMRAnet, perhaps, or the sort of challenges you face in your modeling where you think it might help? If