Jump to content

OlivierL

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

OlivierL last won the day on July 21 2016

OlivierL had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

16

About OlivierL

  • Rank
    Very Active

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Canada

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2009
  • Since
    2003

Recent Profile Visitors

1,279 profile views
  1. wow, you are correct. That is how the feature is documented and implemented! Thanks for posting this. I can't understand why NI chose that implementation but it probably goes back a couple of decades and it might not have been intentional...
  2. Hi, I wonder if this is a bug of LabVIEW or if I misinterpret the "Range" function in the case selector. In the VI Attached, a string is used to select a case in a Case Structure. there is a case for "0".."9" that LabVIEW accepts but if you input the string "9", LabVIEW executes the Default case. If you change the case to "0".."9", "9", then first of all LabVIEW doesn't return an error saying that values are not unique and it behaves as expected if you pass the string "9". Can anyone explain why LabVIEW would exclude the last value in the range? Cheers, Olivier Last
  3. Looking forward to another NI Week and Lava G BBQ. Thanks a bunch David for posting on the other thread. I had given up after seeing no new messages by the end of June.
  4. PY: Did you ever find a way to work around your problem? I found new information that may be useful to you. I played around some more with the functionality today and it really seemed that the invoke Node called "App:Disconnect From Slave" had to be called from within the RT target itself to work, as suggested on the NI forum. Then I tried some other tests to see if it is possible to Run a VI directly on a RT target (that is in your project). At first, I thought that it was not possible and couldn't figure it out until I found this link: http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/Loading-and-Running-
  5. Thanks. I should've added that the conversation moved to here: https://lavag.org/topic/19341-security-who-cares/page-2#entry116714
  6. Interesting read! Thanks for the link. I guess our situation is different than most others as we only need the tunnel for security. I'm sure that will change in the future so we'll keep an eye on the topic of interactive SSH sessions.
  7. So a quick test definitely confirms that the MyRIO has SSH tunnel support enabled and a connection can be established from Windows using "plink.exe" (Putty) with System Exec. The command to System Exec: d:\Installed\Putty\plink.exe -ssh admin@192.168.0.66 -pw Passwrd -C -T -L 127.0.0.1:9988:192.168.0.66:8899 (9988 is the port on the Host/PC, 8899 is the port I open in LabVIEW on the target, 192.168.0.66 is the MyRIO address.) Neat, thanks for the heads up Shaun. This is a lot faster and easier than our original idea and it is my answer to your original question about my tak
  8. Is the screen shot a connection to a RIO unit? Have you been able to test down to port forwarding to the LabVIEW app running on the RIO? I'll try to find some time this week to do my own tests but your toolkit is interesting. For the VPN, it would only be to connect from our office to the client's LAN for example. For the dedicated Host PC, I understand it would only require SSH.
  9. I posted on a separate thread because I thought the two topics differed enough but I'm happy to continue here. I totally missed the SSH option in conjunction with the VPN (for remote access.) That was the missing link that pushed us to think of a more creative workaround. Especially with the Linux boxes, I think that SSH and proper configuration of the firewall to only accept local connections should be good enough for us. The only caveat left in the chain is integrating the SSH client within the LabVIEW application. Fortunately, we would only need to support a single platform (Windows). H
  10. ShaunR's recent topic on Security reminded me of a situation we explored in the summer and need to revisit at some point. We were looking for a method to protect the communication with a cRIO. The situation is that we need to communicate between a cRIO and a host on an unsecured network (manufacturing environment.) We concluded that we needed some form of encryption as well as a standard login mechanism but identified that having a single symmetrical key would not provide enough protection (for various reasons and specific use cases.) Therefore, we looked into SSL and LabVIEW Web Servi
  11. We have used NS on a project recently with a cRIO and we found a few caveats that we were not expecting: The NS engine uses ~10% of each core on the cRIO (9067) as soon as a connection is established (we had three streams) There is also an impact on the host CPU, even if very little amount of data is transferred All NS are unidirectional and limited to one connection (based on your description, you are better off with TCP) The NS properly register that the end point is disconnected ONLY if the connection ends gracefully (completing executing on the Host for example.) If you disconnect the net
  12. You're right. If the same mechanism is used regardless of the option selected (Call & Forget / Call and Collect), there is a need for some mechanism that the "Proxy" VI fills. That makes sense. I'm still not going to move to ACBR but it is interesting to understand (or so we think) what's happening under the hood. Did Stephen ever find the solution to his issue throughout all this?
  13. Yes it keeps running. So why does the ACBR keep running in your case and not the "Run VI"? My guess comes from different implementation of the two methods. Whereas "Run VI" launches the Sub VI as a Top Level VI, "ACBR" actually creates a proxy (Use "Call Chain" in your SubVI to see this). That special Proxy VI then calls the SubVI as a subVI instead of a top level VI. Therefore, another references is created (in the Proxy) to the subVI so even if you close the original reference, the Proxy keeps running and keep Sub VI in memory. In the case of RunVI, if you close the reference, then the
  14. Posted on NI forum to get some support: http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/quot-App-Disconnect-From-Slave-quot-Method/td-p/3218310
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.