Using Expanded-NodeId-Strings rather then regular NodeId-String in configuration #5
Assignees
Comments
|
I have a need for this as well. I tried implementing a PR earlier but got stuck when I discovered I had to include the NamespaceArray in the ParseExpandedNodeIds function call. func ParseNodeIDs(incomingNodes []string) []*ua.ExpandedNodeID {
// Parse all nodeIDs to validate them.
// loop through all nodeIDs, parse them and put them into a slice
parsedNodeIDs := make([]*ua.ExpandedNodeID, len(incomingNodes))
// Get NamespaceArray from the server
// How do I do this?
namespaceArray := []string{"http://opcfoundation.org/UA/"}
for _, id := range incomingNodes {
parsedNodeID, err := ua.ParseExpandedNodeID(id, namespaceArray)
if err != nil {
return nil
}
parsedNodeIDs = append(parsedNodeIDs, parsedNodeID)
}
return parsedNodeIDs
}Do you have any suggestions on how to get the namespace array from the server? Check out the draft here: #14 |
|
you need to read the value of the nodeid "i=2255" which is present in every server and then you need to resolve the namepace name with the index in the array. |
|
Thanks, I will hopefully have time to give it a try this coming week 🙂 Edit: I am not working on this anyway |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Example:
NodeId ->
ns=2;s=IoTSensorsExpanded-NodeId ->
nsu=http://myIoTSensorNamspace/UA;s=IoTSensorsIn scenarios in which changes happen on the shopfloor (OPC UA Server) there is the chance that the NamespaceIndex changes and your configuration will be broken.
Using the NamespaceIndex in a configuration is not a good practice, you should consider switch to the Expanded-NodeId format which uses the NamespaceUri instead of the index. In order to leverage the benefits of the expanded format the OPC UA Client needs to:
this would lead to a much more robust behavior of the OPC UA Client. And if something changes e.g. someone imports a UA-Model or a CS your config will still be valid. This is a issue most commercial products get wrong in implementation!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: