Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

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

  1. #11
    ... and will this "LEAP" API require "the cloud"? I will not install and integration system that cannot function if the Internet (or "cloud") is down...

  2. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    7
    When will the LEAP API be published? Breaking all integrations without a replacement is insane. No one will accept a home automation system without integrations. Many questions are asked here without any response from Lutron.

  3. #13
    Authorized Lutron Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    216
    Thank you for your post.

    We wanted to highlight a few things about Integration with Lutron Devices. Specifically focusing on Telnet and LEAP.

    1. Telnet for existing systems like RadioRA 2 and HomeWorks QS is not going away. Those integrations will continue work as they have.

    2. The LEAP API is something that can be used with Cas├ęta and RA2 Select and is necessary for HW QSX

    3. LEAP is not just cloud integration, it can be local or cloud; common industry alliances in this market are all going local (C4, Crestron, etc)

    4. Lutron is working with a wide variety of 3rd party companies for support of QSX LEAP integration. Most of the big name companies already have integration or have QSX integration coming in the very near future.

    5. If there is a company or product that people would like to see us integrate with, they can email workswith@lutron.com and it will get evaluated by the business

    We also wanted to add a few other additional reasons why LEAP is being used over Telnet. The first thing to emphasize is security with the TLS connection. Another benefit is that LEAP makes integration easier since most of the integrations auto extract the Lutron system config for you (no longer have to mess around with integration reports). One of the rare exceptions to this is Crestron SIMP, but companies like josh.ai and C4 pull in the config for the integrator to make it easy. This could be done in the past with Telnet and XML but LEAP config can be pulled dynamically vs an XML file that only gets compiled at transfer.

    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.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    132
    I think here is a very small percentage of people out there like Nate S above that is more of a hobbyist and a non-professional. They want to use DIY or custom made products to control Lutron, just as they were able in the past with Telnet since almost every homebrew solution supported Telnet. They don't care about, or are prepared to handle the insecurity of Telnet (however small that threat is). And to that I agree. If anything, ship the product with Telnet disabled and force the user to enable it on their own at their own risk.

    My opinion is as a Crestron/Lutron/Savant programmer just having the ability to control is really what we need, and now that at least we have Crestron modules that is good enough for now. The fact that Savant has nothing still is kind of suspicious as I'm sure one of the two parties isn't playing well with each other, or maybe Lutron is holding a grudge due to Savant purchasing GE Lighting. But for me 1 out of every 50 installs is Savant instead of Creston so its not a big deal yet for me.

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    3
    having trouble setting the old lutron/integration telnet log in, is it possible at all or has it been completely dismantled? i believe the homeworks version is 15.5. it seems to not allow a simple password. any help would be of great appreciation

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by Audiovation View Post
    having trouble setting the old lutron/integration telnet log in, is it possible at all or has it been completely dismantled? i believe the homeworks version is 15.5. it seems to not allow a simple password. any help would be of great appreciation
    I believe you cant have a super simple password anymore but yes you can still use Telnet with QS. Just need to add another login on the Integration screen

  7. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    3
    unfortunately elan control needs to use the old lutron/integration username and password,

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    132
    Dont know much about Elan- you cant change the credentials in the module (or whatever programming is used to interface with Lutron)? Without that you are SOL when it comes to controlling QS, unless you updated from an older version in the 10.0 range which I believe would let you keep the existing lutron/integration credentials. But if you started with newer software you cant use that.

  9. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    3
    the driver has the telnet login info built into it :( its a bummer and i know they are working on a fix for it.it would be nice if lutron gave the option (as it does with ra2) to keep the default telnet login info.guess its a waiting game...

  10. #20
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    13

    Please re-think removing telnet support

    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.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-03-2020, 10:56 PM
  2. 6CL, 6NA discontinuation coming?
    By randyc in forum General Discussion - RA2
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-06-2019, 12:02 PM
  3. concerned about myLutron requirement to use software
    By SparkyCoog in forum Troubleshooting - RA2
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-01-2018, 11:20 AM
  4. New Client Concerned About RF Health Issues
    By jkvossen in forum General Discussion - HWQS
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-05-2017, 02:45 PM
  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
  •