Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  1
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Very concerned about discontinuation of Telnet and breaking existing integration

  1. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    6

    Half baked

    Quote Originally Posted by lmaugustin View Post
    Telnet is the ultimate escape system to integrate with the long tail of random devices that exist. It's a bit like the contact closure interface of the Internet world. Every project I touch has a long list of contact closure integrations for controlling everything from hot tubs to fire pits to pergola louvers. Similarly, there's a long list of random home devices from security cameras to video distribution and switching to appliances that are now network connected and with Telnet we can create simple integrations. Whatever integration mechanism exists it needs to be open and simple, and it's important that it is designed to allow people in the field to build their own. If the only option is a list of pre-built integrations, it will force us to look for an alternative to Lutron.
    I mean you could develop a co-processor using a raspberry pi translating commands for older un-secure telnet devices to communicate with Lutron... but we have no references to the new api so even diy systems like home assistant can't even control it yet. Having direct access to the communications protocol for manual testing and diagnosis was also useful in a pinch.

  2. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2022
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Josh R. View Post
    What I want to mine from this is exactly what it is that people are trying to control that they cannot and what is causing the grief on the forum. It is not clear to me in reading the thread if it is heartburn caused by Savant or if they really did make their own integration? In talking with many dealers over the years, I would be surprised by how many really made their own large scale drivers that are outside of the major manufacturers that already make drivers for the industry.
    If Lutron stops working with open source platforms like Home Assistant it will be fatal for me. I'm not interested in a closed platform that can't interoperate with open source solutions and "non-business" or "non-integrator" products and devices.

  3. #23
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2022
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by lmaugustin View Post
    Telnet is the ultimate escape system to integrate with the long tail of random devices that exist. It's a bit like the contact closure interface of the Internet world.
    This is a great analogy. I'd happily settle for an open and documented LEAP API, though.

  4. #24
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by nugget View Post
    I'm not interested in a closed platform that can't interoperate with open source solutions and "non-business" or "non-integrator" products and devices.
    Lutron is not for you. Lutron doesn't want you to be able to work on your own system because installers would lose work. Lutron relies on the installers to push their products.

    They do the same with 3rd parties, only allowing integration by the largest companies to give them exclusive access with the hope that those companies will push Lutron products.

    It's unfortunate Lutron sticks to this ancient business plan. Instead of having an empire of excellent products that are all applicable for every possible customer and that everything integrates with, Lutron fractures their markets, product lines, and integrations. They separate product into low/medium/high without upgrade paths between them. They don't publish their APIs, limiting 3rd party integrations.

    None of this is about the end user's best interests. Lutron chooses to be closed and proprietary in an attempt to control the market. Ironically, choosing to be exclusive rather than widespread mean inevitably someone else will do it better.

  5. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    6
    Lutron does have a custom integration, commercial, and DIY markets. And they all had documented telnet API...

    The thing is, as an installer, having a documented API is a massive help on a job 6 hours away with poor cell reception and the slowest internet you'll ever see. We have a surprising number of Lutron jobs that survive on well on the edge of civilization but when things go wrong and you can't call very easily, the almost fully documented API for HWI and HWQS has saved me so many times.

    Then there is custom requests, these require the maximum understanding of limitations of the API. So we now tell our customers that Control4 works, we don't know how, Savant wants your first born to work, and the rest is mystery meat so don't ask us how it's made. It's frustrating.

  6. #26
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    10
    Yep, and now there is nothing. Well, there are some OSS libraries, reverse engineered from Lutron's Android app. There goes your quality, Lutron, when you force people to go off the rails. The libraries appear to work for now, but I wouldn't be surprised if Lutron found a way to kill unofficial access. There's no way I'm putting HW QSX into a job and hoping a hacked up, unofficial API never fails. Not everyone wants C4 or Savant. Lutron putting all their eggs in the C4 or Savant basket is super dumb, especially now that Savant is pushing their own products.

  7. Likes SparkyCoog liked this post
  8. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    549
    For as long as I remember, Crestron, Savant, and Control 4 have been trying to come into Lutron's turf and do their own lighting. I get that this isn't Lutron isn't going to get into their turf and do AV the way a company like Vantage does (which I think is a mistake to be honest because their lighting suffers because of it), but if Lutron wants to do lighting, they should be the BEST and most OPEN lighting platform. Crestron wants to do their own lighting and still connect to Lutron? Great! Nothing wrong with that, but make everything open so every local AV company can do their own custom integration and every small company can link up too. Don't give exclusive deals to your frenemies.

  9. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    228
    I think the problem is really security. They dont want anybody or a bot being able to easily telnet in and control the system. While I somewhat agree, I dont really see the risk of what could happen. I mean whats the worst thing- someone turning lights on and off? I mean maybe yea oh they could wipe or brick the processor with some malicious attacks but is this really happening?

  10. #29
    Many people were addressing the can't access Lutron issue here. While I do agree with them, but I got a more burning question on the opposite direction:
    Somfy shade control which was working prior v15 and QSX was working fine from Lutron, now cannot be used.
    In my understanding, the only way doing Lutron and RS232 is to use a 3rd party control system, which detects a Lutron Keypad buttonpress, and based on that, send an RS232 command to a device.
    Is there any way to do it directly?

  11. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    25
    If it's security, Lutron could enable, HTTPS (TLS) transport and REST APIs with an API key. While I like the simplicity of telnet, a REST API can easily be controlled via scripted curl commands. The API key controls secure access.

    Regardless, I have many telnet integrations and can't upgrade without a way to build custom integrations.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. New Client Concerned About RF Health Issues
    By jkvossen in forum General Discussion - HWQS
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-01-2021, 05:09 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-03-2020, 10:56 PM
  3. 6CL, 6NA discontinuation coming?
    By randyc in forum General Discussion - RA2
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-06-2019, 12:02 PM
  4. concerned about myLutron requirement to use software
    By SparkyCoog in forum Troubleshooting - RA2
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-01-2018, 11:20 AM
  5. Traditional Telnet integration via Smart Bridge Pro?
    By SparkyCoog in forum 3rd-party Integration - CAS
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-01-2016, 08:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •