From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=c3=b6rn_Lundin?= <b.f.lundin@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Simple Components 4.12 with MQTT implementation released
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:12:44 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <neqj6s$iis$1@dont-email.me>
References: <nejfta$lmg$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <d536dcf9-e710-4ff7-9953-4272dda304f6@googlegroups.com>
 <nenq6h$18jn$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <6d3b7ac5-8fc6-406c-8aac-947d25a78249@googlegroups.com>
 <neohin$ttp$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nep0d9$vnc$1@dont-email.me>
 <c0a6c1c9-ac45-4e16-84f8-129134287764@googlegroups.com>
 <neq74m$1lbc$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <a92ea534-9221-40b0-8219-08abcff6ccda@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:27:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="6a09ccc49493ecf301ef65af9aa456c7";
	logging-data="19036"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/HSv6a5f3W/SvuuJmRwpRF"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/38.7.0
In-Reply-To: <a92ea534-9221-40b0-8219-08abcff6ccda@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7sW1xqhCtqUkBFox9U8o3ZY4TXQ=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:30122
Date: 2016-04-15T13:12:44+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2016-04-15 12:06, slos wrote:

> I agree that OPC UA does not fit where EtherCAT, Sercos III or PROFINET IRT would.
> OPC was created for office and SCADA / GUI applications access to PLC data, not for IO processing.

For pulling data to office use from a PLC is ok.
But protocols have a tendency to be used in other ways than originally
designed for.
I've stopped several integration projects the last couple of years,
where the PLC-programmers wanted OPC (DA). they went live with
proprietary socket protocols instead, with great success.
PLC-programmers usually like OPC because they do not need to
do very much in order to make it work on their side.
Then it does not matter that it is a clunky protocol.

--
Björn