| ▲ | German Rheinmetall open-sources its Battlesuite connected weapon system protcol(rheinmetall.github.io) |
| 84 points by summarity 2 hours ago | 18 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | alhirzel 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| Reminds me a lot of the Tactical Microgrid Standard (aka TMS aka MIL-STD-3071) [1], probably just because TMS uses DDS as well. I would really like to know if there is a protocol that functions like DDS but caters to real-time guarantees and prioritizes (at a "simple protocol" level) usability on embedded systems with no dynamic memory allocation. It would also need to be just-as-functional with non-real-time systems. One problem with DDS is that it is too heavy-handed to implement well on an embedded system. [1] https://battery.army.mil/system-integrator-hub/tms/ |
|
| ▲ | throw1234567891 20 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Nah, they haven't open sourced anything: https://github.com/rheinmetall. They just published the documentation. Really weird, what's the point? |
| |
| ▲ | pixelesque 6 minutes ago | parent [-] | | They've got the IDL files as well for the APIs, but you can't use them without their libs: > The data model is defined using a custom format .rmodel based on the ddkit
> framework (rmodel-api). > Please note that the .rmodel data model is for documentation purposes only and > does not reflect the actual interface used on the communication layer. Network > communication is only possible through the provided libraries. |
|
|
| ▲ | j-pb 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| First I was excited, then I saw that it's based on DDS. |
| |
| ▲ | budman1 an hour ago | parent [-] | | why the hate on DDS? seems like a perfect fit. | | |
| ▲ | j-pb 43 minutes ago | parent [-] | | DDS is the least bad of the stuff that has come out of OMG, but it's not a nice middleware still. There is no underlying algebra of that composes nicely when compared to Zenoh for example, and the "vendor independence" and compatibility is usually a joke. There's a reason ROS is moving away from it again. | | |
| ▲ | bahmboo 2 minutes ago | parent [-] | | There's a standard that has OMG as the acronym? OMG. I'm not even going to bother to search for that! |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | karmicthreat 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This looks like ROS2 for missiles. |
|
| ▲ | exabrial 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I cannot find boomstick anywhere in here |
|
| ▲ | 9dev an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Am I just too ignorant of Miltech, or is this that in large parts recreating Standard messaging primitives that other protocols and systems have been providing for decades already (so invented elsewhere?) |
| |
| ▲ | pixelesque 39 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | DDS sort of took over from CORBA in the military domain, and the statically-typed IDL was still quite similar to CORBA last time I looked at it, so that takes you back to around 1998 when CORBA was being used a lot in the military in my experience. What other protocols and systems were you thinking of that can provide (depending on broker) hard-realtime delivery that can be used in safety-critical systems? | |
| ▲ | esseph an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Every mil company designs unique bespoke things often with some exceptions, and even the "open systems" mostly aren't open by any stretch of the definition. Obscurity is part of the allure, not a repulsive factor. You don't want a hostile nation suddenly and easily understanding your systems. | | |
| ▲ | smalltorch an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | On the other hand, its good to design systems where it wouldn't even matter if the hostile nation state knows exactly how it works. This is a principle in cryptography, but carries nicely to other things. | | | |
| ▲ | touisteur 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Asterix is an actual standard for radar data, coming from civilian radar systems. I wish it was updated somehow for 3d beam-steered (and moving) sensors, but still it covers most of the industry's needs... I keep hearing so many grumblings of replacing it (it is binary, unforgiving, quirky, very 80s...) and of course fragmentation is back in. | |
| ▲ | graemep 34 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Hat sounds like a particularly weak form of security by obscurity | |
| ▲ | mc32 41 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Also you do not want them to benefit from your smart design choices. You want them to suffer from their bad choices and not learn from your success. (Yes, of course you could have bad design choices that you don’t realize someone else has solved more intelligently.) | | |
|
|
