Re: [Qscada-developers] R: Exciting news

[wireless <wir...@ta...>]

Paolo Sereno wrote:
> Hi James,
> back in Italy, but still busy.
> I=B4m here even if it seems I=B4m diseppeared.
> Thanks for your help and effort
> take care
> paolo

Hello Paolo,

It's always good to hear from you. Hang in there. Things will get
better for you and all of us. You and yours are in my prayers
and I hope you work everything out. On a brighter note, every time
I talk to somebody about Qscada, they think it is a wonderful idea.
We just need to get it to a point where we have some simple hardware
on the net for folks to see and control. AT that point, I think
it will explode with excitement as a project.


In my opinion, I think it's good for you to 'hang back' and let the
indians hash out quite a lot. That way, you can enter the debates
at a later stage, as 'father wisdom' once the emotional spew
is spent and folks are ready to get to work.


On anther note, I rather like Jovan quite a lot. He's very up_tempo
and crazy_maniacs like myself need a good rudder, now and then.
Besides, we both agree on pushing the RT needs as close to the
remote hardware as possible. That is the RT needs to be satisfied
on the processor that is the closest to the field hardware. Whether
it's a pc running qscada on a small control network, or a plc that
has 3 processors between itself (the field plc) and final qscada server,
RT requirements should be on the (micro)processor closest to the
final (controlled) elements. But, we can support both scenarios
and everybody will be happy. I've spent lots of time on RT issues
with pc(servers) and it's not where I want to spend my time.
Besides, on the Qscada server end, I'm leaning more to
"openmosix" as a cluster, to provide High Availabilty for QScada.


Supporting this "dual modality" of RT will allow vendors with products
such as PLC with pid cards to be excited about Qscada. This is
a very important point too. If we keep Qscada attractive to commercial
companies, eventually all but the largest will get on board with
Qscada. Those companies that do not get on board with Qscada will
have their "proprietary portocols" reverse engineerd so they will be
compatible without consent/control of their destiny.....
If we support an architecture that allows one to mix and match
both commercial offering and Qscada,(down to running pid loops)
on a qscada machine in lieu of commercial plcs, then Qscada will
allow for easy transition for utilities and companies, by allowing
them to initially just replace their legacy scada server with
Qscada.


Last, I want you to know that I pray for people. It's part of my
fundamental beliefs, so, If you are hurting or need a friend or want
somebody to pray for you and yours, just let me know.... Our faith
is the only thing that separates us from the animal kingdom.......

Keep the faith,
always your pal,


James