9 ms·
Tesla Transport Protocol over Ethernet (TTPoE)
- yobid20 2y ago[flagged]
- elcritch 2y agoTwice now I’ve been excited that this was for realtime ethernet used in teslas vehicles. Alas, it is not.
- sgu999 2y agoAny reason to believe they don't use one of the standard industrial protocols like the poorly named EtherNet/IP?
- kvmet 2y agoLicensing probably? CAN (or one of its more modern variants) are historically more common in automotive. However with 2-wire Ethernet connections becoming more commonplace I do think you're right that more and more cars will be moving to ethernet fieldbus. EtherNet/IP is not as robust for many applications as its competitors (PROFINET, EtherCAT) since it is not fully deterministic. EtherCAT is my personal favorite.
- DannyBee 2y ago+1 - ethercat and profinet are the way. Random guessing - Ethercat seems more likely to take over for CAN because CoE (canopen over ethercat) is so common. It's very easy to turn CAN devices into ethercat ones. Harder to turn them into profinet ones. Seems like a more incremental path for car makers. otherwise the main advantage of profinet is that you can treat it like regular ethernet (IE switches, etc), but not sure anyone cares in a car.
- LeifCarrotson 2y agoOf all the (current) industrial protocols they could have picked, Ethernet/IP would be the worst. Its only advantage is that it can coexist with other TCP traffic and run over standard switches, but that just results in unreliable fieldbus performance.
- MisterTea 2y agoPlease no EIP, its utter crap and designed by an OOP huffing committee. The only serious protocol is EtherCAT with honorable mentions for Sercos 3 and Ethernet Powerlink (CANopen over Ethernet).
- digitallis42 2y agoI did a skim and didn't see any explanation of why one would want it over TCP. Did I miss, or is it non obvious?
- lloeki 2y agoFrom a cursory look: - looks dead simple - no IP layer (there's a ttpip folder in that repo though) - distributed congestion control (TCP has a "window" field + a bunch of tentative RFCs, this has a purposeful "congestion") - 100% implementable in hardware (TCP can, but it's complex) Not a general TCP replacement, but the README properly highlights a "many endpoints local link" use case: > the protocol executed entirely in hardware and deployed to a very large multi-ExaFlops (fp16) supercomputer with over 10s of thousands of concurrent endpoints. This protocol does not need a CPU or OS to be involved in any way to link and execute.
- dsldksldjsd 2y ago[flagged]
- Beretta_Vexee 2y agoI think it's better to think of it as a fibre channel protocol rather than TCP. It's intended for use on managed internal data centre networks. It skips OSI layers to gain speed and probably do 100% hardware routing with FPGAs. It's of no interest on the internet or any small scale netwwork.
- 2y ago
- high_na_euv 2y agoReally interesting
- thelastparadise 2y agoWhy?
- high_na_euv 2y agoRecreating foundational infra doesnt seem so common, especially for car company
- aeonik 2y agoCAN, MOST, Flexray, LIN, K-Line were all invented for automotive use. 2 wire Ethernet is also a thing that they spearheaded.
- Cthulhu_ 2y agoIn a sense this wasn't from Tesla the car company, but Tesla the IT department with a supercomputer. I don't know what they do on it though, might be lots of physics simulations (aerodynamics etc) or deep learning for assisted driving tech.
- literalAardvark 2y agoIn older interviews Musk said that the Dojo is intended for deep learning. So most likely that. I agree that this seems to have very little to do with cars.
- martindbp 2y agoThey train an end-to-end model to drive based on 8 camera streams and recorded input from human drivers, training on tens, (if not hundreds now) of millions of 30 second clips from their consumer fleet. That's why they're bought one of the largest GPU clusters and making their own chips and transport protocols. It's not widely known, but Tesla probably has one of the largest training cluster, because practically all the GPUs they buy go towards training, while most of GPUs for e.g. OpenAI go towards inference. Tesla does inference in the car.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Alex4386 2y ago[flagged]
- billsmithaustin 2y agoOr perhaps Elon is not personally involved in what network protocols they use on their Dojo AI supercomputer.
- Spooky23 2y agoTesla is a weird company. They are hyperfocused on GM-like micro cost cutting in the cars. Yet they spend expensive engineering time on stuff like this. Maybe there’s some big cost savings in the backend.
- zaroth 2y agoIt’s for FSD, which when fully realized, will have a global market cap of over $10 trillion.
- adgjlsfhk1 2y agoI think the difference is that Tesla plans like a tech company in that they assume they will build an infinite number of cars so any fixed cost optimization is going to be worth it eventually
- nsteel 2y agoI don't think QUIC is a good example. If you realistically want to do something on the internet you absolutely have to use either TCP or UDP. There's no choice in it. But within the confines of your datacenter you can do whatever you want. Including re-inventing the wheel to be square-shaped if that fits better.
- fidotron 2y agoI legitimately couldn’t tell if the poster was sarcastic. Overpromotion of QUIC is verging on meme territory.
- KeepOnTruckin1 2y ago[flagged]
- _joel 2y ago[flagged]
- dang 2y agoCan you please not post like this? Regardless of who you're talking about or how you feel about them, it's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- 7e 2y ago[flagged]
- iphoneisbetter 2y agoCan confirm FSD is a total fraud. I was only able to use it for 158 miles of my 160 mile journey yesterday. Absolute vaporware, totally.
- moooo99 2y agoAnecdotal evidence go brrrr. FSD may not be total trash, but it objectively isn’t what was promised it to be in 2020 (?)
- scarby2 2y agoAt worst it's a partial fraud though.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- moooo99 2y agoI‘m not a lawyer, but if courts would deem this to be fraud, Tesla would have to take accountability towards their customers as well as their shareholders.
- dailykoder 2y agoWell, who would've thought that the real world is actually hard?
- mikestew 2y agoApparently not Tesla, but I’m not sure I get your point. Or maybe that was your point. :-)
- travisgriggs 2y ago
- kardianos 2y agoThere was a talk about this prior. This was used in place of TCP, but where TCP is designed to run over unreliable networks, this protocol achieves speed and latency figures comparable to others, while still being able to retain commodity IP switches in the cluster. By having a fixed buffer, no lingers, faster opens, they increase the speed and latency, without going to dedicated vendors or other stacks.
- throw0101a 2y agoPrevious discussion from ~month ago, "Tesla’s TTPoE at Hot Chips 2024: Replacing TCP for Low Latency Applications": * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41374663 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41374663 * https://chipsandcheese.com/2024/08/27/teslas-ttpoe-at-hot-chips-2024-replacing-tcp-for-low-latency-applications/ https://chipsandcheese.com/2024/08/27/teslas-ttpoe-at-hot-ch...
- FuriouslyAdrift 2y agoBe interesting to see how this stacks up to the dominant protocol in supercomputers/ai clusters : Infiniband.
- nine_k 2y agoAFAICT this is very much about handling unreliable links and congestion control. Infiniband instead makes the sides bargain to avoid packet loss, while the medium is supposed to be reliable.
- throw0101b 2y ago> Be interesting to see how this stacks up to the dominant protocol in supercomputers/ai clusters : Infiniband. As mentioned in README, this was submitted to the larger Ultra Ethernet consortium for consideration: > Deliver an Ethernet based open, interoperable, high performance, full-communications stack architecture to meet the growing network demands of AI & HPC at scale * https://ultraethernet.org https://ultraethernet.org
- glzone1 2y agoI thought infiniband was more expensive and that even AI where bandwidth is super important was trying to get away from it towards cheaper options.
- iamleppert 2y agoHow is this better than UDP? Or for that matter, just plain old Ethernet MAC addressing? You can achieve lower latency and speed (than this) if you don't care about reliability in your transport layer. This reaks of NIH.
- leetharris 2y agoDid you even try reading the README? - TTPoE is designed to be implemented at hardware level unlike UDP - UDP cannot guarantee transmission whereas this does - TTPoE is built for distributed resilience
- mannyv 2y agoI worked with a company that wrote its own protocol for Ethernet and got almost wire speed. It was worth it for 10, but not worth it at 100mbps. You can always beat general purpose solutions like the TCP/IP/UDP stack if you try. For most it isn’t worth it.
- bilekas 2y ago> Some variables may have changed slightly without documentation updates, but we're sure you can figure it out I hope they're not hoping for mass adoption with an attitude like that. Not exactly inspiring confidence in the longevity and maintainability.
- serf 2y agoit feels more like a way to sweep liability away rather than a real warning.. ..which also does not inspire confidence.
- glzone1 2y agoWhy does this not inspire confidence in Tesla. Their internal software stack is available to their own developers who can review what is actually there. Why does it have to be perfectly documented in a public github? Are all other car companies "properly" publically documenting things in github? Does it inspire more confidence in VW's software stack if they don't share it? Is VW's confidential stack some big competitive advantage? I've used a VW ID electric vehicle. I did not come away that impressed.
- Fidelix 2y agoBecause Tesla and Musk bad... or something of the sort. This is the way it goes here in HN for anything related to Musk.
- bilekas 2y ago> Because Tesla and Musk bad... or something of the sort. No, spec bad. Protocol unknown. Poof edit: > This is the way it goes here in HN for anything related to Musk. Nobody mentioned Musk ... Except you.
- Sysreq2 2y agoI don’t think mass adoption is their goal. They had a problem. They solved that problem. They shared how they solved said problem. Every engineering company releases stuff like this. It’s not meant to change the world. It’s marketing to recruit other engineers who would find that problem interesting.
- henning 2y ago[flagged]
- electronbeam 2y agoIs it missing a license?
- pnw 2y agoThe header files all say it's GPL 2. But yes, they should have a license file at the top level.
- nimbius 2y agoTesla seeks to work to standardize a new high-speed/low-latency fabric (be that TTPoE or otherwise) for AI/ML/Datacenters however theres nothing inherently abject about TCP as it exists today. RDMA over Converged Ethernet suffices perfectly well for whatever an "AI/ML/Datacenter" is and if we're being fair, the lackadaisical approach to the documentation suggests that they may not be taking it as seriously as they could anyway. If Tesla were really seeking to shake things up they wouldnt have picked IPv4 to do it when the newest release has been around for nearly 30 years and has latency reduction baked in. this smacks of a pandersome attempt from a company that sees the quite mandarin writing on the walls and has decided (in true Muskovite fashion) they too are just a misunderstood font of futurism.
- pclmulqdq 2y agoRoCE sends huge packets down the wire. TCP has the wrong abstraction for truly high performance. I wouldn't necessarily standardize what Tesla does here, but most of the big companies have their own layer 3 transport protocol for things that need truly high speed and are operating within a datacenter. Cray/HPE has their own Ethernet-based protocol (Slingshot was an earlier version of it - not sure what its name is now) which seems to be better than whatever Tesla has, but is not necessarily published.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]