it is not quite clear if your tool has to do with both protocols at a time. Do you have to transport data from one protocol to another? Nevertheless, the base of all is CAN, as you already said, and, since higher protocols use normally different ways for handshaking and/or data transport, they are able to coexist within the same CAN network. CCP
defines only a peer-to-peer communication which uses two CAN IDs (two 11-bits standard or two 29-bits extended IDs) for the communication, one for each direction, sending each time a maximal of 8 data bytes (as the underlying CAN). NMEA 2000
( based on the J1939 protocol, which is itself based on CAN, of course) in the other hand can handle large messages (1785 bytes at a time) and for this it defines a complex method for message packaging and node addressing, allowing nodes in a network to communicate in a peer-to-peer or in a broadcast form. The protocol use extended Identifiers for coding in it the source and destination addresses, the PGN (parameter group number) identifying the content of the message and some other information.
By the way, there are not stupid questions
. There are many
CAN based protocols which are itself base of other higher protocols. For this reason, in some cases it is possible that some drawback can appear. But in your case I think is not a problem.
As conclusion and to respond to your actually questions:
tj_40071 wrote:Will this configuration work?
Yes, it should work without problems. Since NMEA 2000 uses only extended ids, keeping the CCP CRO/DTO Ids with standard Ids avoid any collision problems between the protocols.
tj_40071 wrote:Is there any drawback to this scenario?
Only if the Ids for CCP packages are defined as extended and when these can reflect any NMEA 2000 Id that can appear in the network in a given time.
I wish you good luck with your project and have fun by learning CAN.