Automotive Ethernet: Trends, Protocols, and Challenges with Reference to IEEE 1722

Abstract

The rapid evolution of in-vehicle electronics and the growing demand for high-bandwidth, real-time data exchange have positioned Automotive Ethernet as a cornerstone of next-generation vehicle architectures. Although earlier advancements relied heavily on legacy protocols like CAN, LIN, and FlexRay, they increasingly fall short in supporting the scalability, flexibility, and performance required by modern ADAS, infotainment, and zonal systems. Automotive Ethernet, fortified by IEEE Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) standards, now enables determin-istic, low-latency communication across multiple vehicular do-mains, fostering convergence of heterogeneous systems onto a unified backbone. The development, important protocols, and current trends in automotive Ethernet deployment are all thoroughly examined in this review. The paper systematically examines critical technology gaps—including challenges in scalability, interoperability, real-time determinism, network complexity, and security—that impact the effectiveness and future readiness of in-vehicle networks. Drawing from current research and standardization efforts, the review proposes robust solutions and strategic directions—such as unified network architectures, advanced TSN scheduling, modular design, and integrated security frameworks—to address these systemic challenges. Specific protocols like IEEE 1722 are discussed as illustrative examples within the broader context. Ultimately, this work offers a holistic perspective on enabling scalable, interoperable, and secure Automotive Ethernet for next-generation vehicles.

Introduction

The automotive industry is transitioning from legacy in-vehicle networks (e.g., CAN, LIN, FlexRay) to Automotive Ethernet, driven by the needs of ADAS, autonomous driving, real-time diagnostics, and infotainment systems. Traditional protocols can no longer meet the bandwidth, latency, and scalability demands of modern vehicles.

Automotive Ethernet and TSN Integration

• Automotive Ethernet offers high bandwidth (10 Mbps to 10 Gbps), full-duplex communication, and scalable, standardized networking.

• When combined with Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) standards (e.g., IEEE 802.1AS, Qav, Qbv), it provides deterministic, real-time communication crucial for safety-critical applications.

Key TSN Standards

• IEEE 802.1AS: Precision time synchronization

• IEEE 802.1Qav/Qbv: Traffic shaping and time-aware scheduling

• IEEE 802.1CB: Frame redundancy for fault tolerance

• IEEE 802.1DG: TSN profile customized for automotive use

Communication Protocols over Automotive Ethernet

• SOME/IP: Service-oriented middleware for ECU interaction

• DDS: High-performance, real-time publish/subscribe middleware

• MQTT: Lightweight protocol for telemetry and cloud integration

• IEEE 1722 (AVTP): Transports synchronized audio/video/control streams with TSN support

IEEE 1722 (AVTP) in Automotive Networks

• Operates at OSI Layer 2 and supports:

  • Multimedia streaming (audio/video)

  • Control message encapsulation (e.g., CAN over Ethernet)

  • Clock synchronization

• Enables interoperability between legacy systems and modern Ethernet backbones.

• Supports applications like multi-zone audio, ADAS camera feeds, and real-time control.

Emerging Trends

1. Zonal architectures: Simplify wiring and centralize processing using Ethernet backbones.

2. TSN adoption: Supports real-time safety-critical applications.

3. Domain convergence: Merges infotainment, ADAS, control, and telematics onto a single network.

4. Multi-gigabit Ethernet: Supports increasing data loads from sensors and connectivity.

Technology Gaps Identified

1. Real-time performance: Ethernet’s non-deterministic nature still struggles to match FlexRay’s guarantees, despite TSN.

2. Interoperability: Complex integration between old (CAN, LIN) and new (Ethernet) systems.

3. Security: Lack of built-in encryption in Ethernet raises vulnerability concerns.

Proposed Solutions

1. Advanced TSN Scheduling: Use centralized controllers and simulation models to optimize traffic prioritization and latency guarantees.

2. Middleware-Based Integration: Develop unified, service-oriented frameworks for seamless protocol translation and cross-domain communication.

3. Layered Security Frameworks: Implement MACsec (IEEE 802.1AE), secure boot, redundancy, and real-time monitoring for safety and cybersecurity.

Conclusion

The ongoing evolution from traditional fieldbus architec-tures to high-speed, deterministic Automotive Ethernet marks a fundamental shift in the design of in-vehicle networks. Automotive Ethernet now stands at the core of next-generation mobility, providing the scalability, bandwidth, and flexibility required for increasingly complex applications—ranging from real-time control and safety systems to rich infotainment and connected vehicle services. To fully realize the potential of Ethernet-based car architectures, new issues brought about by this transition must be methodically resolved. This review has identified three major technology gaps that currently limit the widespread adoption of Automotive Ethernet: ensuring strict real-time communication and la-tency guarantees, achieving seamless interoperability across heterogeneous networks and legacy systems, and providing robust security and functional safety in the face of rising connectivity and cyber threats. While recent advances such as Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) have laid the groundwork for improved real-time performance, and middleware-driven approaches promise to bridge legacy and next-generation do-mains, significant work remains. To address these challenges, we have proposed a set of future directions: leveraging advanced TSN scheduling and centralized control for deterministic communication; deploy-ing middleware-driven frameworks and unified gateways for transparent network integration; and adopting multi-layered security and redundancy strategies tailored for automotive re-quirements. These approaches, when combined with rigorous industry standardization and collaborative ecosystem develop-ment, will be crucial for delivering scalable, interoperable, and resilient in-vehicle networks. Ultimately, the continued collaboration between standard-ization bodies, OEMs, suppliers, and the research community will drive the successful realization of truly future-proof automotive Ethernet networks. By proactively addressing these technology gaps, the automotive industry can pave the way for safer, smarter, and more connected mobility—meeting the demands of tomorrow’s vehicles and their occupants.

References

[1] ”Intra-Vehicular Communication Protocol for IoT Enabled Vehicle Health Monitoring System: Challenges, Issues, and Solutions,” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 95309–95337, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3424418. [2] ”Enhancing performance of in-vehicle network protocols for intel-ligent transportation,” 2024 First International Conference on In-novations in Communications, Electrical and Computer Engineer-ing (ICICEC), Davangere, India, 2024, pp. 1–5, doi: 10.1109/ICI-CEC62498.2024.10808461. [3] ”Design and Implementation of Controller Area Network-Transport Pro-tocol Software Based on C#,” 2024 5th International Conference on Elec-tronic Communication and Artificial Intelligence (ICECAI), Shenzhen, China, 2024, pp. 572–576, doi: 10.1109/ICECAI62591.2024.10674848. [4] ”Experimental Analysis of Wireless TSN Networks for Real-time Appli-cations,” 2023 IEEE 28th International Conference on Emerging Tech-nologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Sinaia, Romania, 2023, pp. 1–4, doi: 10.1109/ETFA54631.2023.10275665. [5] ”Simulating TSN traffic scheduling and shaping for future automotive Ethernet,” Journal of Communications and Networks, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 53–62, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.23919/JCN.2021.000001. [6] ”An Overview of Automotive Electronics [Automotive Electronics],” IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 130–137, Sept. 2019, doi: 10.1109/MVT.2019.2923329. [7] ”IEEE Standard for a Transport Protocol for Time-Sensitive Applications in Bridged Local Area Networks,” IEEE Std 1722-2016 (Revision of IEEE Std 1722-2011), pp. 1–233, 16 Dec. 2016. [8] ”A study on the architecture of the in-vehicle wireless sensor network system,” 2013 International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2013, pp. 826–827, doi: 10.1109/IC-CVE.2013.6799907. [9] D. G. Vrachkov and D. G. Todorov, ”Research Trends for Wireless Solutions in Automotive Ethernet,” 2019 X National Conference with International Participation (ELECTRONICA), Sofia, Bulgaria, 2019, pp. 1–3, doi: 10.1109/ELECTRONICA.2019.8825630. [10] ”IEEE/ISO/IEC Telecommunications and exchange between information technology systems – Requirements for local and metropolitan area networks – Part 3: Standard for Ethernet AMENDMENT 8: Physi-cal layer specifications and management parameters for 2.5 Gb/s, 5 Gb/s, and 10 Gb/s automotive electrical ethernet,” in IEEE/ISO/IEC 8802-3:2021/Amd8-2021, vol., no., pp. 1–210, 2 Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1109/IEEESTD.2021.9599619. [11] X. Wenchen, Z. Libin, Z. Zhipeng and J. Huating, ”Research of Automotive Ethernet Media Dependent Interface (MDI) Designing,” 2023 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Big Data and Algorithms (EEBDA), Changchun, China, 2023, pp. 1671–1674, doi: 10.1109/EEBDA56825.2023.10090613. [12] A. Gercikow, S. Schaffenroth, H.-P. Schmidt and A. Kolpin,¨ ”Measure-ment Platform for Physical-Layer Analysis of Industrial and Automotive Ethernet,” 2020 IEEE Sensors Applications Symposium (SAS), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2020, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/SAS48726.2020.9220024. [13] P. Hank, S. Muller,¨ O. Vermesan and J. Van Den Keybus, ”Automotive Ethernet: In-vehicle networking and smart mobility,” 2013 Design, Au-tomation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE), Grenoble, France, 2013, pp. 1735–1739, doi: 10.7873/DATE.2013.349. [14] W. Zaiyuan, C. Xichen, X. Zhe, Z. Yue, Z. Haosen and Z. Dengyu, ”Analysis of the Influence of Mode Conversion Characteristics of Twisted Pair on Automotive Ethernet EMI,” 2022 Asia-Pacific International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility (APEMC), Beijing, China, 2022, pp. 176–179, doi: 10.1109/APEMC53576.2022.9888721. [15] M. Hampe, S. Mortazavi, A. Stieler, K.-D. Tieste and L. Claus, ”Analysis and Assessment of the Common Mode Termination for Automotive Ethernet 1000BASE-T1,” 2020 International Symposium on Electromag-netic Compatibility - EMC EUROPE, Rome, Italy, 2020, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/EMCEUROPE48519.2020.9245722. [16] F. L. Soares, D. R. Campelo, Y. Yan, S. Ruepp, L. Dittmann and L. Ellegard, ”Reliability in automotive ethernet networks,” 2015 11th International Conference on the Design of Reliable Communication Networks (DRCN), Kansas City, MO, USA, 2015, pp. 85–86, doi: 10.1109/DRCN.2015.7148990. [17] T. Kawauchi, A. Iwata, H. Urayama, T. Izumi, K. Takayama and T. Hagihara, ”Physical Layer Simulation Technology for Automotive Ethernet,” 2019 IEEE CPMT Symposium Japan (ICSJ), Kyoto, Japan, 2019, pp. 107–110, doi: 10.1109/ICSJ47124.2019.8998745. [18] J. B. Park, S. B. Oh and J. W. Jeon, ”Analysis of SOME/IP-CAN Communication,” 2023 International Technical Conference on Circuits/Systems, Computers, and Communications (ITC-CSCC), Jeju, Korea, Republic of, 2023, pp. 1–5, doi: 10.1109/ITC-CSCC58803.2023.10212447. [19] H. Khemissa and P. Urien, ”Towards a centralized security architecture for SOME/IP automotive services,” 2023 IEEE 20th Consumer Commu-nications & Networking Conference (CCNC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2023, pp. 977–978, doi: 10.1109/CCNC51644.2023.10059950. [20] T. Lu, X. Zhang, Z. Wang and M. Yan, ”A Feature Distribution Smoothing Network Based on Gaussian Distribution for QoS Prediction,” 2023 IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), Chicago, IL, USA, 2023, pp. 687–694, doi: 10.1109/ICWS60048.2023.00087. [21] A. S. Sadeq, R. Hassan, S. S. Al-rawi, A. M. Jubair and A. H. M. Aman, ”A Qos Approach For Internet Of Things (Iot) Environment Using Mqtt Protocol,” 2019 International Conference on Cybersecurity (ICoCSec), Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia, 2019, pp. 59–63, doi: 10.1109/IC-oCSec47621.2019.8971097. [22] H. Jang, C. Park, S. Goh and S. Park, ”Design of a Hybrid In-Vehicle Network Architecture Combining Zonal and Domain Architectures for Future Vehicles,” 2023 IEEE 6th International Conference on Knowledge Innovation and Invention (ICKII), Sapporo, Japan, 2023, pp. 33–37, doi: 10.1109/ICKII58656.2023.10332574. [23] ”IEEE Approved Draft Standard for Ethernet Amendment: Physical Layer Specifications and Management Parameters for 100 Mb/s Operation over a Single Balanced Twisted Pair Cable (100BASE-T1),” in IEEE P802.3bw/D3.3, August 2015 (Amendment of IEEE Std 802.3-201x), vol., no., pp. 1–49, 1 Jan. 2015. [24] S. B. Oh, Y. S. Do and J. W. Jeon, ”The Time Synchronization of CAN-FD and Ethernet for Zonal E/E Architecture,” 2023 International Tech-nical Conference on Circuits/Systems, Computers, and Communications (ITC-CSCC), Jeju, Korea, Republic of, 2023, pp. 1–5, doi: 10.1109/ITC-CSCC58803.2023.10212902.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Vismay B S, Mr. Jignesh Kantilal Thanki, Prof. Anusha L S. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.