Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Protocol question regarding queries

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    403

    Protocol question regarding queries

    Is there any way to tell if a ~ response was based on system-generated activities or from a query by another system?

    As in, if I wanted to check the state of a zone's occupancy, but I also had something monitoring the repeater, how would I avoid conflict?

    The scenario being I want to check the state of a zone that has an occupancy sensor. To do so I'd use the ?GROUP,ID,3 command, correct? That would return a ~GROUP,ID,STATE (3 or 4) based on what the system knows of it.

    However, the system itself will also send a ~GROUP,ID,STATE when a zone changes on it's own. Either from a sensor or a rollback.

    I think this has come up before with regarding to being able to tell the difference between queried results and system activity.

    Is there a way to differentiate between queries and actual activity?

  2. #2
    I think you're overcomplicating this. The worst that's going to happen is that the monitoring application will see a duplicate state change message. That is, it'll see an "occupied" message when the state is already occupied. If it's programmed properly, it should ignore that message (since it's not a state change).

    Also, if you have a monitoring application, why not ask IT what the state is, instead of asking the repeater?

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    403
    One concern has to do with rollbacks. I'm not entirely sure how an area with a rollback configured for it is going to handle anything inquiring about status of any devices in it. I'm not entirely sure what the repeater constitutes as activity for resetting a rollback timer.

    As for overcomplicating, well, if the system didn't mix query responses with actual activity then it wouldn't be an issue.

    Once upon a time with only the devices involved in making changes it probably didn't matter. Now with the potential for more varied interaction is can get messier to maintain state. The connect bridge, tablets/phones, etc.

  4. #4
    I still think you're overthinking this. When a repeater action causes a device change, the repeater reports that change over the integration interface. It's exactly the same report that you get when you do a query. I think you're looking for a distinction that doesn't exist.

Similar Threads

  1. Integration protocol freezes up every 2-3 minutes
    By siegeld in forum 3rd-party Integration - HWQS
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-22-2017, 12:01 AM
  2. occupancy sensor protocol
    By totesthouse in forum 3rd-party Integration - RA2
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-01-2016, 04:02 PM
  3. MUX link protocol documented anywhere?
    By wkearney99 in forum 3rd-party Integration - CAS
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-25-2016, 04:57 PM
  4. Smart bridge pro and integration protocol
    By TheVince in forum General Discussion - CAS
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-29-2015, 11:39 AM

Posting Permissions

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