Embedded Systems: Comments on TAVA White Paper?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

I've recently finished reading the "TAVA White Paper" which addresses the issues surrounding embedded systems.

It's 24 pages long available at:


(Heads up: You'll need a PDF file viewer to download, read and print it)

While this document is aimed primarily at manufacturing facilities, it seems to me to be an applicable to a wide range of businesses which use embedded systems (i.e just about everyone). It also outlines the difficulty inherit in just identifying where these systems exist and how they integrate into your key business processes.

I found the document very useful, if rather disturbing (more evidence that a great many business are ignoring the larger picture).

What I haven't seen is any discussion saying, in essence "these people are wrong/misguided/over-reacting". If they are not wrong, then this would imply that many businesses and government organizations may in fact be quite a bit further behind than they have currently acknowledged.


-- Arnie Rimmer (arnie_rimmer@usa.net), October 12, 1998


Arnie, interesting site, but I could not readily find the 24 page white paper. Could you give us a more specific URL, or hints on what to click on? Thanks.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), October 12, 1998.

Yep, sorry. Try more precisely:

http://www.tavatech.com/co nt_PS1.htm

This page then links directly to the PDF file. (There's also a link to the Adobe site if you need a PDF reader.)


-- Arnie Rimmer (arnie_rimmer@usa.net), October 12, 1998.

This post meant just to close the blockquote (indent). -Arnie

-- Arnie Rimmer (arnie_rimmer@usa.net), October 12, 1998.


-- Arnie Rimmer (arnie_rimmer@usa.net), October 12, 1998.

OK, here is my comment on the white paper: confirms everything that I thought that I knew. Learned a lot about how SCADA works, a hot topic on Y2K/power threads. Overall, though, I can't help but think that anyone who starts today on the recommended methodology for any reasonable size company (or town) might be finished by ... 2003? I mean, it is a lot of work!

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), October 13, 1998.

Took a look at the paper. Have two problems with it - first they are trying to sell Y2K remediation services. Lets face it, you don't make a sale by telling the customer he might or might not need your services. Second, they specifically mention the Allen Bradley PLC as something that needs to be checked. I know it was just an example, but they chose the most common PLC that I know of from personal experience in heavy industry, practically all of which (for many years back) are date compliant to 2029! The ones that aren't are almost certainly not in use now. So I feel they have exaggerated the problem somewhat.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), October 16, 1998.

Paul Davis I appreciate your willingness to give the other side of the picture. It helps to put perspective on the news. (This isn't saying that I no longer expect Y2K to be a 10, but as long as people are working at it, maybe the "Mongul hordes" of the future will be kept somewhat in check.) As long as we are all preparing to the best of our economical and emotional abilities, a ray of sunshine can only help.

-- Lois Knrr (knorr@attcanada.net), October 16, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ