You are on page 1of 5

TEKA. COMMISSION OF MOTORIZATION AND ENERGETICS IN AGRICULTURE – 2012, Vol. 12, No.

1, 275–279

New elements in vehicle communication
“media oriented systems transport” protocol
Andrzej Sumorek, Marcin Buczaj
Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering, Lublin University of Technology, Poland

S u m m a r y. Until recently, no significant breakthroughs
have occurred in the area of functional efficiency of automotive vehicle communication protocols. The transmission speed
for “high-speed” communications busses and protocols is still
much slower than those of a typical computer network. Neither
the High-Speed CAN (1 Mbps bandwidth) nor TTP protocol
(10 Mbps bandwidth), can be compared to the 1 Gbps bandwidth that is typical for widely used computer networks. Other
difficulties are that these vehicle communication networks are
nonstandard and frequently use proprietary protocols (e.g.,
communication methods, communication medium and data
formats). In contrast, computer networks have much more advanced capabilities. They are capable of a range of functions,
from sending simple serial messages to maintaining sessions
based on multi-media data. These functions remain lacking in
the automotive vehicle communication protocols. One of the
protocols in which functionality and bandwidth has reached
much higher levels than competitive protocols is the Media
Oriented System Transport. The purpose of this publication is
to review new functions introduced in its latest version.
K e y w o r d s : Media Oriented Systems Transport, Vehicle
Information Network.

INTRODUCTION
Communication protocols and buses used in automotive vehicles went through a different development process
than typical solutions used in computer communication.
The main focus of automotive communication interfaces
was initially the exchange of simple diagnostic messages.
The function of such systems was to monitor and regulate the amount of pollution emitted by the vehicle. The
second step of the evolution of the buses was to limit the
number of failures by limiting the number of connections
and the length of the wiring [19]. The next developmental step was to increase the safety and functionality of
the vehicle by increasing the bandwidth between the
larger number of communication ports. At this point,

two major development trends of communication buses
can be identified. The first of them was to replace the
mechanical connection with connections between multiple devices using buses (Drive-by-Wire, X-by-Wire)
[14]. The main concern with such a solution is limiting
the failure rate. The second development direction was
to increase the user comfort by integrating multi-media
subsystems. A simple user interface is frequently implemented to manage complex automotive multimedia systems. The integration of various dedicated devices (e.g.,
telephone, DVD player, MP3 player) into a single system
is difficult.
One of the key solutions to solving the problem of
communication between various devices is the bus and
protocol Media Oriented Systems Transport (MOST). The
Media Oriented Systems Transport bus was created as
a result of experience with the previous bus, Domestic
Digital Bus (D2B) [10].
Similar to the previous D2B, the MOST bus uses an
optic fiber link as the primary communication medium.
This optical solution allows for even the slowest version
to achieve the throughput similar to the highest speed
rated in other communication networks, such as FlexRay
(10-20 Mbps) [2].
EVOLUTION OF „MOST” BUS
As mentioned before, the MOST evolved directly
from the D2B. The D2B was developed with the sole
focus of supporting multimedia devices. Similarly, the
main functions of MOST are multi-media and telematics [21]. As a result, the MOST bus is located at the
boundary of the vehicle control subsystems (Fig. 1)).
Safety mechanisms implemented in MOST protocols
(checksum, ability to create a redundant interconnecting
ring, from 25 to 150 Mbps bandwidth, error rate in the

Later versions of the MOST protocol implemented increased transfer speeds. 16] Fig. This feature is introduced in spite of the fact that the bus frequency is different from the data sampling rate. 7. Handing of this new data Fig. The most typical data type is synchronous.276 ANDRZEJ SUMOREK. Control data is sent as a set of four byte packets. information about accessed files. The protocol of data exchange in MOST25 is much more complex than other protocols (e. The control data is responsible for managing communication between the network ports. 19. 2. 20. 21. The basic MOST25 (25 Mbps) works with a sampling rate of 44. In addition to a continuous increase of the bus throughput. the data frame is 32 bytes long.g.data format [5. CAN. 2. The doubling of the throughput is achieved in MOST50 by increasing the size of the frame from 64 to 128 bytes (Fig. and data of capsulated protocols within the MOST system. 15]. For the isochronous data type. A single frame can be up to 64 bytes long and can be used to send data as synchronous. 2). LIN) [12. Further increase of the frame size results in achieving throughput of 150 Mbps in the protocol MOST150 (Fig. 2). 2). or control (Fig. frame modifications are introduced. which represents multimedia data and occupies the largest configurable portion of the frame. MOST protocol . Asynchronous data is used to support multi-media information such as GPS systems.. MARCIN BUCZAJ range of 10 -10 [21]) allow utilization of MOST for almost any configuration. Also.1 or 48 kHz. 3) [6. …. maintained in a 64 byte frame. typical synchronous data types have been complemented with the addition of an isochronous type. 4. Vehicle network with a ring of MOST bus [5] a) Format of MOST frame Header 1 byte 64 bytes Data field Synchronous 26-60 bytes b) Asynchronous data Arbitraon field 1 byte Target address 2 bytes Asynchronous 0-36 bytes Control Trailer 2 bytes 1 byte max 58 bytes Data length 1 byte c) Control data Source address 2 bytes Data CRC 0. 48 bytes 4 bytes 32 bytes Arbitraon field Target address Source address Message type Data 4 bytes 2 bytes 2 bytes 1 byte 17 bytes Fig. Due to this fact. asynchronous. 3). a feature reserving a required portion of the bus throughput is introduced. Structure of MOST frame [6] CRC Trailer 2 bytes 4 bytes . and the frame has to be divided into 16 sub-frames by each individual communication unit (Fig. 1. 3. The basic communication unit of the protocol is created with 16 frames (Fig. 9].

which does not require as low a failure rate as that of advanced applications. sequence counter. MOST is equipped with synchronous/ isochronous channels and asynchronous/packet channels capable of allocating a portion of the bandwidth to each of the required services. Safety layer concept [3] The MOST protocol appears to contain characteristics allowing for easy integration of existing multimedia networks with driver assistance network. 1). Based on these characteristics. a GSM module or a garage/house control equipment [1.4 dB/m [17]. Tests performed on increasing communication speed have been conducted in the Fraunhofer Institute. In the previous MOST versions. which were performed within the asynchronous channel. An additional application layer gives additional functions of monitoring correctness of exchanged data (Fig. A typical application of the MOST protocol falls under the Infotainment network category (Fig. This performance dates back to the year 2000 (Fig. even faster solutions are being pursued with designers attempting to take advantage of the physical layer of the optic fibers. It is even possible to perform parallel addressing using both methods at the same time. Key characteristics of bus that allow this integration include [3]: – high throughput – “driver assistance” systems are required to interface with a larger variety of sensors and actuators. the asynchronous channel was renamed Packet or Ethernet. pedestrian warning. car-to-infrastructure communication. and message delays.2 meters and an absolute loss coefficient of 0. night vision. 4. frame failures. NEW CAPABILITIES OF MOST150 Advanced driver assistance systems such as: collision warning. adaptive cruise control or pre-crash warning require integration with a wide variety of vehicle subsystems. and relatively low cost. 9]. message length. A second change is the way the asynchronous channel is handled. MOST Ethernet Packets allow addressing methods identical to the Ethernet network [6]. Having packet communication and IP protocol available allows for easy 277 Fig. 4. The MAMAC layer was replaced with MHP (MOST High Protocol).communication cannot be susceptible to errors caused by: failure of network nodes. the results indicated that the optical fiber connection solution functioned properly with lengths up to 11. 4). Even on the basic communication layer (Fig.25 Gbps. Data rate of vehicle buses in 2000 [18] . demonstrated the ability to achieve a throughput of 1. It also allows for communication with peripherals such as a fuel distribution. lane guidance. MOST150 shows optimal fit as a network for the Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). introduced by MOST150. 2). traffic sign monitoring. – deterministic-function . At the same time. The POF-Plus (Plastic Optical Fiber). which is mainly used for transmitting audio/video data from application servers with a guaranteed bandwidth allocation [7. Another key change was the elimination of an adaptive layer MAMAC (MOST Asynchronous Medium Access Control). The throughput in the range of 150 Mbps. Fig. 5. lane departure warning. Under this MOST protocol. – high safety margin . the MAMAC layer was responsible for the TCP/IP transmissions. which were typically managed by computer devices. In spite of that. low sensitivity to interference. 5). and timeout detection.NEW ELEMENTS IN VEHICLE COMMUNICATION “MEDIA ORIENTED SYSTEMS TRANSPORT” type is managed by three isochronous channel servicing protocols. it is possible to monitor communication quality through cyclic redundancy check. and sending 372 bytes in a single frame is possible. 13]. The MHP layer allows use of the asynchronous channel to address the MDP data packets using 16-bit addresses or the MEP Ethernet data using 48-bit addresses. MOST25 and MOST50. Additionally. is the highest within any of the vehicle communication networks. The ability to simultaneously define a portion of bandwidth for multiple synchronous channels gives an ability to control both throughput and delays. This channel can now share the bandwidth with a synchronous one. implemented within the MOST layer. The first of these types is QoS Isochronous IP (streaming). all required parameters must be fulfilled over a wide temperature range (-40 C to 95 °C). introduction of car-to-car. Such solutions are characterized by low weight.the necessity to provide safety requires implementation of protocols based on stiff time bounded rules guaranteeing small and predictable delays. Undoubtedly the most significant changes were introduced in the area of handling digital data. The features mentioned above confirm that MOST150 can function as a safe system within its own nodes or nodes of other networks.

as described in the article. Two transport mechanisms for protected content [8] Internet access has become a necessity for people who require continuous access to real/time data. which exists under two versions. TCP (Transmission Control Protocol). Model of IP architecture of a vehicle infotainment system [11] For communication between devices utilizing the IP protocol. Version 3 of the DTCP protection is covered by Supplement B (M6 cipher). The features of this network. CONCLUSIONS Fig. This circumstance could lead to exceeding the throughput of the packet channel [8].SAD.g. Version 1 is common for synchronous and uncompressed content. The future design direction of IP for the MOST network focuses on more effective utilization of higher level layers of the OSI model [11].75 Mb/s resulted in achieving utilization of the throughput up to 82%. 7). allowing compliance with copyright laws. Due to the implementation of the Ethernet channel introduced in MOST150. REFERENCES 1.278 ANDRZEJ SUMOREK. . – The high throughput and the predictable behaviour of the protocol allows implementation or utilization of this protocol in future applications for advanced driver assistance systems. with 107 Mb/s under practical conditions. A difficulty might arise when accessing two sets of data which are protected using different methods. and protection DTCP-IP version 1 is covered by Supplement E (AES-128 cipher). – The maximum throughput of 150 Mbps does not even approach the possible boundaries of the communication speed of the MOST protocol. – The protocol contains features allowing access to protected content. the driver and passengers have access to functions based on: IP (internet protocol). vol. the use of MOST has moved beyond infotainment applications.. or HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol). 6). 7. 6. Practical tests of the efficiency of packet type communication were conducted by Daimler.. The results indicated the ability to achieve theoretical throughput of 142. Both of these were implemented in the MOST protocol. the MOST150 Ethernet Packet Channel is used. Fig. This represents 75% utilization of the throughput capability. while Version 2 is dedicated to compressed and protected content (interface independent adaptation-IIA). 9-17. lead to the following conclusions: – The advanced communication frame fulfils requirements of both diagnostic and multimedia communication. Years of development of the MOST network/protocol resulted in achieving a very mature solution capable of servicing a large variety of data types. audio. The HDCP IIA transport stream is protected such that audio requires additional deciphering from an elementary stream. The head unit can also act as a hot spot for WLAN devices such as a smart phone or tablet PC (Fig. MOST utilizes two schemes of DTCP deciphering such that a synchronous channel is used for multimedia. it is important to be able to utilize wireless networks protection such as ciphering. Physical access to the network is achieved by making a connection to the head unit (HU). Boguta A. ISSN 1641-7739. Fig. Due to the vehicle mobility. and an additional synchronous channel is used for supplemental data required for the deciphering process (e. The internet also serves as a source of multimedia data and allows users to connect other mobile devices. XI. Difficulties might arise in the case of HDCP protection. which functions as a central router independent of the connection type (wire or wireless). 2011: Application of IP monitoring in the supervising system of a building. This requires simultaneous transfer of the stream and the cipher key with the utilization of the isochronous channel. Two primary mechanisms of data protections are: DTCP (Digital Transport Content Protection) and HDCP (High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection). To date.8 Mb/s. MARCIN BUCZAJ Multimedia content frequently requires protection from unauthorized access or duplication. and video transport stream. the cipher key inside of the Synchronous Added Data . pp. Teka Komisji Motoryzacji i Energetyki Rolnictwa. Introduction of the limitation of available throughput to 43.

. Vehicle Information Network. Wydawnictwo Instalator Polski. jest zróĪnicowanie metod komunikacji i formatów danych. to protokoáy komunikacji pojazdów dopiero rozwijają takie uniwersalnej funkcje.The Automotive Multimedia Network. 58-60.. Zimmermann W. p. pp. NOWE ELEMENTY PROTOKOàU KOMUNIKACYJNEGO POJAZDÓW „MEDIA ORIENTED SYSTEMS TRANSPORT” S t r e s z c z e n i e . 2010: Wykorzystanie moduáu GSM do zdalnego monitorowania i zarządzania pracą wybranych ukáadów w pojazdach.. Leonhardi A.MOST. p. 17. tom 12.. Schmidgall R.. SMSC Automotive Infotainment Systems. 2012: Let Me Entertain You. 8. 2002: Expanding Automotive Electronic Systems... 4. Wense H-Ch.NEW ELEMENTS IN VEHICLE COMMUNICATION “MEDIA ORIENTED SYSTEMS TRANSPORT” 2. 2011: ZróĪnicowanie protokoáów diagnostycznych. 21. Kohler H. 10. którego funkcjonalnoĞü i przepustowoĞü jest bardziej rozwiniĊta niĪ u konkurencji to protokóá i magistrala Media Oriented Systems Transport. From MOST25 to MOST 150 . Germany. 2008: MOST150 – The Next Generation Automotive Infotainment Backbone. 2583-2592. 5. Widerski T. Klaus-Wagenbrenner J. Niniejsza publikacja ma za zadanie przybliĪyü funkcje wprowadzone w jego ostatniej wersji.. 56-57.. Maniscalco M. Mazurek S. 2008: Magistrale danych w pojazdach. 5-7. Warszawa. Wydawnictwo Instalator Polski. KĊdzierski J. PrĊdkoĞci transmisji osiągane przez protokoáy i magistrale okreĞlane „high-speed” są niskie w porównaniu z przeciĊtnymi przepustowoĞciami sieci komputerowych.. Zerna C.. Teka Komisji Motoryzacji Energetyki i Rolnictwa. 363-372. Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i àącznoĞci. 18-31.... Buczaj M. Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i àącznoĞci. Hauke R. ISSN 1641-7739. Warszawa. 2004: Samochodowe sieci informatyczne (MOST). p. O ile sieci komputerowe mogą przesyáaü zarówno proste komunikaty szeregowe jak i prowadziü sesje oparte o dane multimedialne. March 2000. Pietrzyk W.. 11.. Elektronik automotive 3/2012. Frazis Verlag GmbH. Elektronik automotive. Protokoáy i standardy. 279 Sumorek A. 2005: Samochodowe sieci informatyczne. Walter U. 35-37. Auto Moto Serwis. 9. 2008: Sieci wymiany danych w pojazdach samochodowych. 231-240.11. 2012: MOST in Driver Assistance. 12. Dáugotrwaáy rozwój protokoáów komunikacyjnych pojazdów samochodowych nie zaowocowaá dotychczas nadzwyczajną wydajnoĞcią i funkcjonalnoĞcią rozwiązaĔ. IP architecture of a MOST150-based infotainment system. Teka Komisji Motoryzacji i Energetyki Rolnictwa. 16.. Karche M. Proceedings of Workshop on ICT in Vehicles . Kolejnym czynnikiem. Munich. p. SMSC Automotive Infotainment Systems. Bott W. 05... Grzemba A. 2008: Computer simulation possibilities in modelling of ignition advance angle control in motor and agricultural vehicles. Special Issue . Motrol Motoryzacja i Energetyka Rolnictwa. Daniluk M. . Weber N.The Automotive Multimedia Network. 139-144. pp. Elektronik automotive. 2000: Introduction to Local Interconnect Network. Warszawa. 7. Poradnik serwisowy. vol. S á o w a k l u c z o w e : Media Oriented Systems Transport. Sumorek A.. Frazis Verlag GmbH. From Theory to Practice.. który naleĪy braü pod uwagĊ. Geneva. 6... 2011: The problems in fibre optic communication in the communication systems of vehicles. 2012: Crux of Matter.. GmbH. 2012: 1000 Mbit/s. 19. Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i àącznoĞci.. Logistyka 3/2011. Buczaj M. Styáa S.2011. Protokóá. Leen G. sterujących i multimedialnych w pojazdach. 15. p. Walusiak S... Merkisz J. Warszawa.Palexpo. 445-452.. p. 49-50. 20. 8. 6/2004. Warszawa. Styáa S. A How to for Testing and Validating the New Isochronous and IP/Ethernet Features of MOST150. Elektronik automotive 3/2012. Heffernan D. Logistyka 6/2010. 2010: Analiza moĪliwoĞci i funkcjonalnoĞü elektronicznych liczników dystrybutorów paliw. 3. p. 13. 5/2005. PrzepustowoĞü rzĊdu 1 Mbps protokoáu High Speed CAN lub 10 Mbps protokoáu TTP jest znacząco mniejsza niĪ przepustowoĞü 1 Gbps typowa dla kablowych sieci komputerowych. p. 18. Widerski T. vol 35. p. 2011: MOST . Grzemba A. Computer. 2011: Testing the New MOST150 Capabilities.. XI.. 2012. 2007: Pokáadowe systemy diagnostyczne pojazdów samochodowych.. 2008: MOST . 14. March 2012. Bosch R.