Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

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
    7
    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.

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
  •