a network which is to be tested by the method according to the invention is represented diagrammatically in fig1 through 3 . the network consists of a number of n controllers 1 as computers , which are in each case connected via an interface 2 to a data bus 3 as the data path . controller 1 and interface 2 form a so called node of the network . the controllers 1 are generally capable both of transmitting data signals and of receiving and processing data signals . the controllers 1 respond jointly to a control 4 , with which a system , for example the control and regulating processes in a motor vehicle , is controlled . the shaded area 5 , which in fig1 comprises the entire network , illustrates that , in the exemplary embodiment represented in fig1 a complete simulation of the entire network is performed , i . e ., that the data signals are generated in a simulated manner , subjected to the priority criteria , and received by the control 4 . an evaluation arrangement 6 evaluates in the way described before the transfer processed on the data bus 3 , dependent on the data signals generated and provided for transfer . examples of evaluations are shown in fig6 and 7 , which are explained in more detail below . fig2 illustrates a so - called emulation , in which the data bus 3 and the interfaces 2 have already been set up in terms of hardware , but the controllers 1 and the transfer to the control 4 are still simulated , as is illustrated by the shaded are 5 &# 39 ;. fig3 shows an exemplary embodiment of the analysis of the completely set up network of controllers 1 , interfaces 2 , data bus 3 and control 4 . the interface with the evaluation device 6 is performed by taking the data from the data bus 3 , as is symbolically indicated by the small shaded area 5 &# 34 ;. fig4 diagrammatically shows the data conditioning for the data flow on a data bus 3 of a can network . the signal taken is conditioned in a signal conditioning stage 7 , which has a driver 8 for signal shaping and amplification and a digital phase locked loop dpll 9 for synchronization . at the output of the signal conditioning stage 7 there is a data signal 10 and a clock signal 11 . the signals 10 , 11 pass to a data conditioning stage 12 , in which the data is first investigated for errors in an error detector 13 , freed of bits additionally inserted for synchronization in a destuffer stage 14 , and brought into a predetermined data format in a formatting stage 15 . furthermore , the data conditioning stage 12 incorporates a real - time clock unit 16 , putting timing marks on to the transferred signals . the data conditioning stage 12 is adjoined by a memory stage 17 , to which a data output 18 and a control line 19 of the data conditioning stage 12 pass . control signals are exchanged between data conditioning stage 12 and memory stage 17 via the control line 19 . the memory stage 17 includes a first - in - first - out memory , via which the data , provided with timing marks , passes gradually to the evaluation unit 6 . fig5 illustrates that substantially the same data formats are used for the analyzer operation ( fig3 ), the emulator operation ( fig2 ), and the simulator operation ( fig1 ). the data signals transferred in real conditions in the network are formatted as represented in fig5 for the analyzer operation . they contain some identification symbols , the actual data , in the present case in a maximum of eight bytes , and a multiplicity of control data . for the emulator operation , control bytes are used , which have a similar significance for controlling post - processing and evaluation as the correspondingly defined control data parts in the analyzer operation . for the data transmitted , time stamps trt and tct are distributed for the transmission request time and for the reception time . the time stamps trt and tct for the time of the transmission request and of reception , respectively , extend over four bytes from the msb ( most significant byte ) to the lsb ( lowest significant byte ). for the controllers only receiving a data signal , the time stamps for the transmission time are omitted . in the analyzer operation , the data signal can be replaced only by the time stamp tst , which in the exemplary embodiment represented only consists of two bytes because it only contains a relative time . in any case that time is recognized to be measured which is determined by the end of a data signal transmission , that point of time corresponds most likely to time mark tct of the simulator or emulator operation . it would also be conceivable to measure the end of the data signal . the time of the transmission request , which is required for evaluation , must be established indirectly . for this , best and worst assumptions can be made on the basis of the analyzed data flow on the data bus 3 and the corresponding times determined . the evaluation is preferably based on the worst time and from this the timing mark trt , or the delay on which the evaluation is based , is determined . depending on the application , there may also be other criteria for realistic assumptions for determining the probable delay . fig6 and 7 show exemplary embodiments of the given network parameters , specifically 12 nodes in the case of a data bus with a bandwidth of 1 mbit / s . in the example , 27 messages were to be transferred and transmitted at certain repetition rates . fig6 shows a curve on which it is specified what percentage of the messages can be transferred with which delay time . in the curve represented , just under 50 % of the messages were transferred undelayed , i . e , in the time of 52 μs predetermined by the length of the data signal . the maximum transfer time was slightly over 200 μs . the statistical evaluation gives an average delay time of 86 μs . the statistical evaluation gives an average delay time of 86 μs and a bus occupancy for a single message of 5 . 38 %. in this example , 275 data signals were transferred , only six cases of lost arbitration , in which the transmission had to be deferred due to priority criteria , having occurred . further , 13 data signals were destroyed by noise , so that the transmission had to be repeated . four data signals were delayed excessively . the bus occupancy of 5 . 38 % for an individual message specifies the proportion of this message in the overall load of the data bus . this value is an indication for the network designer to what extent alterations to the priority or the repetition rate of this message have an effect on the behavior of the overall system . a value not shown here but expediently determined , for the overall bus occupancy , gives the network designer an indication whether the chosen bus bandwidth is dimensioned correctly , too generously or too small . fig7 shows the chronology for the transfer of the individual messages . in the first column , the time is specified at which the transfer should take place , in the second column the time at which the transfer has been completed . the third column contains the identification id , which , in the example represented , at the same time contains the information on the relative priority . the comments in the fourth column explain the individual events . the transfer at time 100 is without competition and takes place unproblematically . the transfer at time 370 could not take place because the data bus 3 was occupied by the transfer begun at time 350 . when the transfer of 350 has been completed at time 440 , the signal already waiting at time 370 could not be transferred with id 25 because the network had to give priority to signal id 10 . only after transfer of signal id 10 could the transfer of signal id 25 at time 610 be completed . at time 1230 , signal id 250 was destroyed by noise , so that a repetition was to take place at time 1260 . at this time , however , signal id 25 was given preference , because it had priority . therefore , signal id 250 could not be transmitted until time 1380 and was received by the controllers 1 at a time 1448 . the chronological evaluation according to fig7 allows microscopically accurate assessment as to whether the essential processes for the control 4 have received the correct priority level , so that the control 4 receives the necessary data in the desired response time . this makes it possible to reproduce accurately in detail why and to what extent a certain message was delayed at a certain time . consequently , an individual error case can be analyzed and interpreted , in order then , if appropriate , to make corresponding modification to the network design . the statistical evaluation according to fig6 best reflects the overall behavior of the network . with the aid of these results , the essential parameters of the network , its transfer bandwidth and message priorities are established .