ZPS_XS_E_NO_FREE_EXTENDED_ADDR ; Which Table to increase size

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

ZPS_XS_E_NO_FREE_EXTENDED_ADDR ; Which Table to increase size

618 Views
zigbee1
Contributor III

I'm using the JN-SW-4170 SDK to run a controller under a JN5168 chip.

In the JN-UG-3101 documentation , this is documented as

"No free entries in the extended address table (resource error) - this table is configured in the ZPS Configuration Editor".

Could you kindly clarify which parameter control that Extended Addr, as I don't find any match for it in ZPS Configuration

Just to add, the aim is to create a Zigbee controler capable of managing 70 devices ( ZR and ZED) with a max of 40 Childs

Attached is the ZPS Config used.

 

Thanks in advance

Labels (1)
0 Kudos
11 Replies

457 Views
mario_castaneda
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

Hi @zigbee1,


The default size of the Routing table is 70, which should be sufficient for most applications.
The table size should be increased if routing bottlenecks are observed. The Coordinator needs to store routes to all the nodes in the network if it is required to communicate with every node - in this case, the Routing table size should be increased to the size of the network.


The Routing table is not persisted and any increase will therefore only affect RAM usage.

Regards,

Mario

0 Kudos

524 Views
mario_castaneda
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

Hi @zigbee1,

These recommendations are to be aware of the memory of the JN516X, you have 512 kB Flash 32 kB RAM, and 4 kB EEPROM. So, the coordinator has an address map table is to communicate directly, and the MAC address table is to store the address-pairs of other networks
nodes, in other words, the coordinator could not keep all the IEEE address of the network, this is to avoid high memory usage.

The routing table is the one that you have to increase if it is required to communicate with every node.

Regards,

Mario

474 Views
zigbee1
Contributor III

Thanks, starting to understand.

One more question if I can. How to size correctly the Routing Table Size ?

If I target 70 devices with 40 connected directly to the contrôler, what should the Routing Table Size ?

Should I size it to the expected number of routers I expect as max ?

0 Kudos

552 Views
mario_castaneda
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

Hi @zigbee1,

As we recommend in our document.

The MAC Address table on a node is used to store IEEE/MAC address and the network address of each of these nodes. 

The entries in the MAC Address table are referenced from entries of both the Neighbour table and Address Map table.

The MAC Address table is fully persisted in EEPROM. Therefore, increasing the size of this table will impact both RAM and EEPROM usage.

You could increase the table, but the size is the minimum that the stack requires, but you must be aware of the memory that you have.

Regards,

Mario

0 Kudos

548 Views
zigbee1
Contributor III

I n such could you kindly provide a coherent example.

As the example you took for 100 devices, can you then explain what would be the end result. As I don't understand yourresponse to my question which was

"You stated it is for a 100 Nodes example. However I see the MAC Address Table = Neighbour Table + Address Map = 62 . Shouldn't be equal to 100 ?"

 

Indeed if you want to manage 100 nodes, shouldn't you have the MAC Address Table equal to 100 ? in your example you put 62. If that is valid, what does that mean for the missing 38 nodes. Will they still be able to reach the network , if so where the IEEE/Nwk Address will be store ?

0 Kudos

565 Views
zigbee1
Contributor III

Hello Mario and thanks for the detailed information. Something I don't understanding in your exemple

You stated it is for a 100 Nodes example. However I see the MAC Address Table = Neighbour Table + Address Map = 62 . Shouldn't be equal to 100 ?

 

0 Kudos

570 Views
mario_castaneda
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

Hi,

The error could be for different tables that you set in the .zpscfg file. However, Please look at the recomendations that we provide to set up the tables in the JN5169

Please look at the next User Guide https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/user-guide/JN-UG-3113.pdf B.5 Table Configuration Guidelines

100 Nodes Example

  • Neighbour Table: = 26

         set to 26 - this is the minimum size required for a ZigBee-Compliant Platform

  • Address Map Table = 36

         The Address Map table on a node is used to keep a record of the address-pairs of network nodes with which the local node needs to          communicate directly

  • MAC Address Table = Neighbour Table + Address Map = 62

         The entries in the MAC Address table are referenced from entries of both the Neighbour table and Address Map table

  • Routing Table (it could be equal to 100)

         The default size of the Routing table is 70, which should be sufficient for most applications

Regards,

Mario

 

529 Views
zigbee1
Contributor III

Could you please clarify , you are referring to a 100 Nodes Example, but

MAC Address Table = Neighbour Table + Address Map = 62

 

in addition you mentioned:

The MAC Address table on a node is used to store IEEE/MAC address and the network address of each of these nodes.

So with a MAC Address table of 62, how can you get a 100 Nodes on that network ?

 

0 Kudos

581 Views
zigbee1
Contributor III

Yes, it was already set to 70, so the error reported is based with that value and not the default one of 20

Common/app_common.h:#define ZNC_MAX_TCLK_DEVICES 70

0 Kudos

587 Views
zigbee1
Contributor III

Yes indeed the ZNC_MAX_TCLK_DEVICES has been properly updated to 70 in order to match the 70 devices expectations.

Common/app_common.h:#define ZNC_MAX_TCLK_DEVICES 70

0 Kudos

601 Views
mario_castaneda
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

Hi @zigbee1,

I hope you are doing great.

Could you please check the value of "ZNC_MAX_TCLK_DEVICES" in AN, Our default value is 20 as below:

#define ZNC_MAX_TCLK_DEVICES 20

Let me know if you are still having this issue.

Regards,

Mario

0 Kudos