BMW tests IP networked iDrive car

BMW has started testing an IP solution for its cars that uses standard ethernet to connect car components to the central computer. The testbed could potentially lower costs: if not due to the physical component cost, then as a result of the IPv6 protocol's future-proof design. BMW even feels satisfied that the IP network can cope with safety features, which may be undermined somewhat by the inevitable attempts at high-speed LAN parties in the back seat.

[Via Autoblog]

[podphreak @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:08AM]

...why do we need to network the wheels to the video monitors again???

[paul34 @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:15AM]

? No one said anything about that. Not sure if you have experience with networking, such as with computers, but oftentimes, things are connected to a central unit of some kind. For example, you can network a keyboard and a printer, but you don't network them to each other, you network them to a remote system of some kind and sort of coordinates everything.

Same here, it'd probably be connected to the central computer...

[RyanM @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:18AM]

tire pressure on hud? sounds nice to me.

[podphreak @ Dec 3rd 2007 2:07AM]

I know but do you honestly need to monitor tire pressure from the backseat monitors? Aren't cars mostly intelligent already as far as the communication between the various parts of the car already? I thought that we already had "intelligent braking" and such. It seems a little bit unnecessary to create an entire new infrastructure of wiring when theres already a working system in place. And as far as IPv6 protocol goes, how much data needs to be transferred from the brakes to the rest of the car? I'm more than sure that the current system is adequate for the low bandwidth required for automotive safety systems. I don't know though... maybe its a plan to run over BMW haters without you being able to intervene. Sounds AWESOME!!!

[Duneod @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:37AM]

I dont know why, but im so gonna flash my cars firmware with one that allows homebrew.

[podphreak @ Dec 3rd 2007 6:46PM]

then.. u could install a giant LCD instead of a windshield and play virtual reality mario kart!!! OMG I'M SO BUYING A BMW NOW!!!!

[Scott Peterson @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:11AM]

Im down for a autoban lan party!

[Jeff Haynes @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:11AM]

Nothing could possibly go wrong with this idea.

[Blackstar @ Dec 3rd 2007 6:14AM]

"Oh my god, the LAG! *screeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeech* CRASH!"

[AlexL @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:18AM]

I see several things wrong with this idea.

First of all, ethernet is not a packet switched network like the internet using IP. It is rather a time-divided multiple access network. What this means is that multiple devices connected to the same ethernet switch cannot talk at the same time, Each device must wait for the other devices to finish talking before sending its signal. If a device detects that other devices are talking on the network, it must wait an arbitrary amount of time before trying again.

This is an absurd architecture to use with automobile components, which needs to be a reliable, instantaneous network. Neither the packet switched IP method (which is unreliable and needs additional layers on top to ensure data integrity) nor the time division method suffices for linking auto parts together. Using dedicated wires to link these components together is perfectly fine for these components, and there is no reason to change that. Citing cost cutting as a reason to implement this sort of connection for critical components in an automobile is a ridiculous notion.

[steveo @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:49AM]

@ AlexL - It seems obvious the intent would be to connect each cable (and thus each component) to a switch, thereby eliminating collisions on the network.

This would be great because it would get rid of one of the thousands of specialized parts that adds cost and inhibits cheap repair.

[Harvey Chan @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:51AM]

it's not all necessarily on the same ethernet cable. you could throw a switch in there and utilize QoS to make sure everything can communicate efficiently.

[Matt @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:53AM]

Ethernet is becoming very common in industrial automation these days, and in some applications can have thousands of nodes controlling tens of thousands of I/O devices. Ethernet has proved itself there in applications much more complicated and sensitive to latency than what you would find in a car.

[jonouk @ Dec 3rd 2007 8:47AM]

that's a lot of words for "collision detection". Perhaps you can write an essay talking about collision avoidance in ieee802.11a/b/g. CDMA? bloody hell

[Chris McDowell @ Dec 3rd 2007 9:33PM]

I hear that there are some cars that use a token ring network for the communication between the devices. Mercedes and stuff i believe.

[eric cumbee @ Dec 7th 2007 11:50AM]

Then why are they using ethernet in the avionics of the 787 dreamliner and the latest spec of the 747?

[Brent @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:48AM]

Comcast is shaping the packets on their vehicles tail lights too.

Pierce fire engines have been using a similar system for a few years. After the initial bugs were worked out, it turned out to be a great system. Even us monkeys who drive the things can troubleshoot most problems now.

[bob sakamano @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:52AM]

as long as can connect to wifi from the car and not have to plug-in to the door!

[Adam @ Dec 3rd 2007 8:53AM]

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bolivar Baez @ Dec 3rd 2007 2:09AM]

Bob, I think you are a lil confused.

[Jared J Huffman @ Dec 3rd 2007 2:50AM]

One MAJOR benefit of this is to eliminate or reduce the amount of parallel wiring in a car. It seems to me that cars have huge bundles of unshielded signal wires going back and forth from just about every component imaginable. With some kind of serial connection protocol, wiring would be drastically reduced in size and could easily be MUCH better shielded.

This is, of course, on top of the obvious benefits of centralized component control and handling.

[murray @ Dec 3rd 2007 2:34PM]

Nah, I'm pretty sure they've been using a data bus system in some cars for a while already. Just that it was something proprietary, not ethernet.

[-Tj- @ Dec 3rd 2007 3:00AM]

I'm all for this idea. I've long thought car manufacturers should unify vehicle component wiring to make things cheaper and more user-friendly (connect any part to a PC using common PC-type ports to determine part status, or modify or upgrade part "firmware"), and though such ports may need specific weatherproofing, perhaps the core of the plug could stay the same.

[Ed @ Dec 3rd 2007 6:03AM]

I really only have one question. What are the scissors in the image supposed to mean? I get everything else, the arguments, etc. Seriously though, WTF is up with the pair of scissors?

[Teetdogs @ Dec 3rd 2007 12:55PM]

Engine Cutoff? I dunno just a guess, probably not a good one and I'm probably wrong, wouldn't be the first time.

[Marc @ Dec 3rd 2007 7:04AM]

There is another cool benefit... wires are intrinsically heavy, the more you can get rid of them the more you can reduce the overall weight of the car. F=ma, less weight > more acceleration (or better economy)

[s24adm @ Dec 3rd 2007 7:18AM]

this could be great for after-market/retro-fit upgrades. the possibility of adding for example factory-fit sat-nav to a car that didnt have it from the factory by simply plugging in a cat6 cable to the main server is ALOT easier task than it is at present.

[corrumpu @ Dec 3rd 2007 7:40AM]

There are several mission critical application which use the standard ethernet bus with a similar but not exact ethernet protocol on top.

Read up on AFDX. Next few years when you fly, a switched ethernet network will be ensuring you won't be falling from the sky and your temperature in the cabin is *just* right. Good enough for the air, good enough for BMW>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFDX

[Mark Richardson @ Dec 3rd 2007 8:38AM]

"if not due to the physical component cost, then as a result of the IPv6 protocol's future-proof design."
What dunkoff came up with that non-sequitur, and why did Engadget repeat it?

[Magallanes @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:59AM]

I'm still prefer a computerless car.

[Wolf @ Dec 3rd 2007 2:17PM]

It is my understanding that BMW already uses this technology in some of their newest motorcylces. There is a redundant line that runs down each side of the motorcycle that sensors and the computer ties into. That could be what is represented by the scissors in the pictures, the fact that a line can be cut and everything can still operate. As I recall, they eliminated about 15 lbs on copper wiring when they went to this system. If that is the case, imagine how much weight and complexity can be eliminated from a full car.

[murray @ Dec 3rd 2007 2:37PM]

This is just gonna make it easier for the Cylons to attack.

[ChasCam580 @ Dec 3rd 2007 4:47PM]

Hmmmm, a cop can hack into your cars computer remotely during a car chase and shut you down...

[temur a. @ Dec 3rd 2007 5:19PM]

Top Gear [TV Car show] www.topgear.com
tested this exact car on a track and it worked excellently without needing assistance.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Dec 3rd 2007 9:33PM]

Now you will have a great excuse for getting out of speeding and accident tickets: Brake Lag.

[skhawaja @ Dec 4th 2007 3:35AM]

BMW +1