Network configuration for Conti ARS430RDI

Hi @SivaRamaKrishnaNV

I have contacted Continental and shared my configuration - they say that the Nvidia Drive IP address is not in the same domain as the radar. The Nvidia Drive IP address is“10.1.0.91“ however the Radar’s IP address are in the domain of“192.168.3.xx“, it should be 192.168.3.xx where XX is not .30/.31/32 since those IPs are for the radars provided. They advised to use this configuration, but it still does not work.

    sudo ifconfig eth0:900 192.168.3.99 || true
    sudo route add -net 224.0.0.0 netmask 240.0.0.0 dev eth0:900 || true
    sudo route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev eth0:900 || true

However, if use the Dual GbE Dongle (E3579) and connect the Radar to my PC, I see data packet on Wireshark - attaching the log here. radar_record.pcapng (1.4 MB)

So it confirms that the radar is working, but we are still unable to interface with the Nvidia Drive.

Dear @aliqz9x5,
Did continental confirmed the connection is correct?
We have tested with below connection.
At the board it would look like this when one Molex cable is connected.
image
Usually, two ARS430 share the same port. It splits into two female Molex Mini 50 connectors, to which the data cable from the radar is plugged into.
It looks somewhat like this, but two per port

image

Hi @SivaRamaKrishnaNV
Continental confirmed that the connection on the radar side is confirmed and also we were able to interface it with a PC using the GbE Dongle (E3579).

In your setup you connected the radar to port 4 whereas we connected to port one (above the Quad Camera Ports). We just connected as in your setup but it still doesn’t work.

image

Is there any setting for the ports that we need to do (in the SW or HW) to turn them on? As we don’t see any signal on the ports using oscilloscope.

Dear @aliqz9x5,
Thank you confirming the HW connection with continental.
If the HW connection is correct, The issue should be with network interface configuration.

I am assuming you have not modified any networking files. Could you reboot the target and share the ifconfig?
Also, please share the log for wireshark capture on eth0.
We will check configuring the network interface next and test with wireshark to confirm.

Thanks @SivaRamaKrishnaNV

Here is the ifconfig out:

enP4p1s0: flags=4099<UP,BROADCAST,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:18  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 0  bytes 0 (0.0 B)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 0  bytes 0 (0.0 B)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
enp4s0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet 10.42.0.252  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 10.42.0.255
        inet6 fe80::204:4bff:fef6:6a16  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:16  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 84  bytes 10332 (10.3 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 81  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 81  bytes 11923 (11.9 KB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
eth0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::204:4bff:fef6:6a13  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:13  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 13436  bytes 731578 (731.5 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 3104  bytes 12348031251152 (12.3 TB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
eth0.200: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet 10.42.0.28  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 10.42.0.255
        inet6 fe80::204:4bff:fef6:6a13  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:13  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 13265  bytes 681639 (681.6 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 2875  bytes 219540 (219.5 KB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING>  mtu 65536
        inet 127.0.0.1  netmask 255.0.0.0
        inet6 ::1  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x10<host>
        loop  txqueuelen 1000  (Local Loopback)
        RX packets 889  bytes 149238 (149.2 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 889  bytes 149238 (149.2 KB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

eth0 Recordeth0_record.pcapng (7.5 KB)

Dear @aliqz9x5,
Could you please share content of /etc/systemd/network/99-nv_eth0_default.network.

Dear @aliqz9x5,
Could you add below content to /etc/systemd/network/99-nv_eth0_default.network and reboot the target.

#XA Radar Interface 

Label=eth0:900

Address=192.168.3.20/24 

Please check running wireshark and see if it works. If it does not fix the issue, please share below things again for confirmation after reboot.

  • Contents of `/etc/systemd/network/99-nv_eth0_default.network
  • ifconfig output
  • Radar connection pictures
cat /etc/systemd/network/99-nv_eth0_default.network
[Match]
Name=eth0
[Network]
DHCP=ipv4
[DHCP]
SendHostname=false
ClientIdentifier=mac
#XA Radar Interface
Label=eth0:900
Address=192.168.3.20/24
enP4p1s0: flags=4099<UP,BROADCAST,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:18  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 0  bytes 0 (0.0 B)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 0  bytes 0 (0.0 B)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
enp4s0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet 10.42.0.252  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 10.42.0.255
        inet6 fe80::204:4bff:fef6:6a16  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:16  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 195  bytes 28742 (28.7 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 164  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 164  bytes 25530 (25.5 KB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
eth0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::204:4bff:fef6:6a13  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:13  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 512  bytes 32242 (32.2 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 249  bytes 816043812115 (816.0 GB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
eth0.200: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet 10.42.0.28  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 10.42.0.255
        inet6 fe80::204:4bff:fef6:6a13  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether 00:04:4b:f6:6a:13  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 505  bytes 30677 (30.6 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 190  bytes 17684 (17.6 KB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING>  mtu 65536
        inet 127.0.0.1  netmask 255.0.0.0
        inet6 ::1  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x10<host>
        loop  txqueuelen 1000  (Local Loopback)
        RX packets 652  bytes 126967 (126.9 KB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 652  bytes 126967 (126.9 KB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

eth0_record_2.pcapng (8.2 KB)


Hi @SivaRamaKrishnaNV We are not able to see radar package on wireshark. I have shared our radar connection before. I don’t think radar connection got problem because we are able to see packages on PC with this converter.

Dear @aliqz9x5,
There is typo in the network interface configuration file.
Please add [Address] like below and reboot the target. You should see eth0:900 interface in ifconfig after reboot

type or paste code here
[Address]
#XA Radar Interface
Label=eth0:900
Address=192.168.3.20/24

Hi @SivaRamaKrishnaNV
Could I propose to have a call to sort this? It would be easier and perhaps you could walk us through your setup which is working on your side and we can show you our setup. As we have been trying for so long and still unable to make it work.

Please let me know you availability and we can set up a call.

Dear @aliqz9x5,
Could you please confirm if you see etho:900 interface after making above changes and restart. If not, I will escalate the issue internally to get further support/guidance.