A message from Steve at Smarthome.

[az1324]

There are other devices that use extended commands such as the simplehomenet devices. Also, I think it is important to say that just because there are no devices on the market right now that rely on extended commands, doesn't mean there won't be in the future. For example, specifically mentioned in the whitepaper is the use of extended commands to send encrypted information in cases such as a door lock. Obviously a door lock is going to use wireless communication, but there is no reason it should not have the support of a robust mesh. And future powerline devices which use encrypted commands will definitely need the support of a powerline mesh that supports extended commands.

So I will again bring up the point that the network may seem to work now but it is equally important that you are investing in a network that is future-ready. Since it is now more on topic I will repose the question:

1. Which devices/firmware versions can repeat extended commands? Are you currently shipping any devices that cannot repeat extended commands and if so why?

From the way SteveL phrased his response above (post 17) it seems to imply that the original ("i1") spec was not designed to use extended commands, but the fact is they have been in the spec (whitepaper) from the beginning. Furthermore, I can remember forum discussions in 05/06 about the fact that the reason extended commands didn't work in "i1" was because the firmware in "i1" devices had a bug where the checksum calculation was not performed correctly and thus the (valid) extended commands were discarded.

It is particularly troubling that this has all been swept under the rug and there has been no public disclosure of when the bug was fixed and the answer to the above question provided along with a reasonable path for those with said devices to upgrade them. So again my original questions #2 and #3 naturally follow:

2. Are there any known bugs in current/recently shipped firmwares?
3. What solutions are available for people with legacy devices who wish to have a network that fully supports extended commands (besides adding more access points)?

I think it is important to mention one more time that we are not discussing anything that is not public information by means of the whitepaper.

Let me also say that I like the Insteon technology and products and the above issues are the only things that keep me from being a strong advocate and supporter thereof (read: help generate more customers).

 

[wwat]

Digger Asked: Ok so you are saying that you cannot use I2 to program the switches in cases where you can not get to the I2 switch from the PLM without going through an I1 device? But if you wanted to you could put a accesspoint into that branch circuit to program it and then take it out for normal use?

SteveL Replied:You got it. And it is always a best practice to put an access point at the PLM also. That has been part of my standard install process from day one, it just made sense.

I could be wrong but isn't Digger asking about i1(only) devices and whether they possess the ability to repeat i2 messages? If so then I'm surprised at SteveL's reply???

 

[wwat]

I think that AZ1324 has the best point because of the limitations of the I1 devices you cannot use certian products that are on the market or coming. It will also handicap developers that the I1 devices are still out there.

If you look at one of Steve's previous posts in this thread, he states the following:

The terms i1 and i2 has been used and there was a question of whether they will repeat messages to each other, the answer is yes.

So unless I'm misunderstanding your question I think SteveL has already confirmed that i1 devices repeat i2 messages around the network.

 

[SteveL]

I was not aware of the fact that the new products I am using or the new ones that are coming would not work with my current working setup of new and old devices.

I will report if that happens.

SteveL

 

[az1324]

I find it impossible to understand how the fact that I can reliably send a standard length message throughout my network whereas I cannot with an extended length message is not considered a problem. The bottom line is that any device that does not repeat extended commands is not performing to spec and should be 1. at the very least acknowledged so the user can have the option to replace that device and 2. an offer made to upgrade the device's firmware if it is sent in. This should be also applied to any other firmware bugs.

Side note: The terms i1 and i2 are not being used in a very strict way so it is not always clear of the implied meaning which only leads to further confusion. Most users are using i2 to mean a device which properly uses and repeats extended commands and i1 to mean a device which does not use or repeat extended commands but Steve has not been using this definition in his responses. So please try not to use i1 and i2 in your posts unless you can clarify what you mean by that.

 

[SteveL]

I have had the same amount of access points in my house since they came out. I do have more access points in my house than i did signalincs. This was because i wanted to be able to drive along the back wall of my house which is on a major street and be able to turn my lights on and off. This gave be a wider RF coverage. I did not add more in the last month just to get my system working. I have an ISY and I did program one switch that was i2 with the i2 version without any access points installed. Like i said before, it is not an accurate statement to say that you can't program switches using i2 without alot of access points. I can do it without any from some locations, can I do it from every location in the house...No. There are some locations that require me to have them in.

I'm not sure what more I can say.

I have not used light show in my house, but I am familar with it.

SteveL

 

[wwat]

az1324,

My understanding from what SteveL has said is that ALL devices (apart from battery) will repeat i1 and i2 messages around the network. Only devices designed to use i2 extended messages can utilize its added functionality and only i2 devices can repeat Extended messages.

Added access points help both i2 and i1 messages get around your network but are NOT required.

I find it impossible to understand how the fact that I can reliably send a standard length message throughout my network whereas I cannot with an extended length message is not considered a problem. The bottom line is that any device that does not repeat extended commands is not performing to spec and should be 1. at the very least acknowledged so the user can have the option to replace that device and 2. an offer made to upgrade the device's firmware if it is sent in. This should be also applied to any other firmware bugs.

Side note: The terms i1 and i2 are not being used in a very strict way so it is not always clear of the implied meaning which only leads to further confusion. Most users are using i2 to mean a device which properly uses and repeats extended commands and i1 to mean a device which does not use or repeat extended commands but Steve has not been using this definition in his responses. So please try not to use i1 and i2 in your posts unless you can clarify what you mean by that.

 

[az1324]

wwat,

Like I said I don't wish to use the terms i1 and i2. My only concern is for extended messages. Please also do not buy into the fact that older devices were not intended to use and repeat extended commands. It has been in the spec since the beginning.

Digger,

I know and I don't think Steve is in a position to address those issues but he can certainly acknowledge them and maybe it can be run up the flagpole. Good pun though.

 

[wwat]

wwat,

Like I said I don't wish to use the terms i1 and i2. My only concern is for extended messages. Please also do not buy into the fact that older devices were not intended to use and repeat extended commands. It has been in the spec since the beginning.

Yep, unfortunately I have to agree with that, having browsed through the spec, extended messaging was clearly part of it from the start.

 

[az1324]

or just wait a couple of years until all of the non extended messaging capable devices are dead and buried.

Which is why we at least need the last shipping date of a non extended messaging capable device.

 

[Xpendable]

Just for the record Light Show Master (or LSM for short) does not currently use extended messaging to program the links on devices. We have experimented with extended message link programming in our J-LTFX home automation software (not publically released), but LSM currently does not utilize any extended messages for link programming. Well, we do use extended messages for programming the links on the PLM, but that's serial-only communications and doesn't make it to the powerline. We are not doing extended message linking on the devices that are being linked to the PLM. We'd definitely like to use extended message link programming on the other devices at some point because of the time it saves in programming links, but we're not going to be able to do that anytime soon.

 

[SteveL]

It is not a point that I need to understand. I am well aware of the potential programming time savings it can provide. My general message is that there are only a small amount of devices that are taking advantage if this. And as more products become available the more we will be able to take advantage of their function. Today, if I want to use this function on devices that can take advantage of it…I can. Will some people who only have one or two i2 devices see a problem using that function…maybe. But if you have a mixture of devices then your programming time is still going to vary. For the short time it is a very small part of the overall INSTEON application. I have extended the invitation to anyone who is effected by this to contact me directly.

SteveL

 

[davefred99]

It is not a point that I need to understand. I am well aware of the potential programming time savings it can provide. My general message is that there are only a small amount of devices that are taking advantage if this. And as more products become available the more we will be able to take advantage of their function. Today, if I want to use this function on devices that can take advantage of it…I can. Will some people who only have one or two i2 devices see a problem using that function…maybe. But if you have a mixture of devices then your programming time is still going to vary. For the short time it is a very small part of the overall INSTEON application. I have extended the invitation to anyone who is effected by this to contact me directly.

SteveL

SteveL

First I would like to thank you for coming here and offering your assistance.
I am a current user of Insteon and to be honest do not currently believe I have any of the issues talked about in this thread yet. I like most Cocooners here hold a lot of value in what I read here and present and future purchases are ofteen based on the advise obtained here. It is vital that I trust any Brand name I choose to use. If I loose that trust I will move on.

That said,I would like to point our that the purpose of this forum is to have open honest and informative discussions so all of us can benefit from the vast wealth of knowledge here. Sometimes it may be difficult to answer tough question but if Smarthome/Insteon is to succeed then it must offer full dis closer. At this time it just looks like they are trying to sweep some things under the carpet too me.
When you offer to take these discussions private then the rest of us are left in the dark and ads to that feeling.

Thanks for you assistance, Dave F.

 

[az1324]

Even if people wanted to upgrade their devices and pay for new devices, no one will even go so far as to say all the currently shipping products support extended commands, which to me implies that they are still shipping devices that don't support extended. Nor will they say how to identify devices that don't do extended by their version #.

Instead the message I am hearing is "It's broken, but trust us it's still good enough for you."

 

[gatchel]

I would use all of my Insteon devices for target practice before buying "newer" devices to get new I2 functionality.

I bought into Insteon for a couple of reasons:

1. X-10 Compatibility
2. Message relaibility over X-10
3. Dual Mesh Network...Which we all know is really BS to begin with. I was mislead to believe that all devices used RF and powerline to communicate, along with many others..
4. Price / Design


EVERY manufacturer that I can think of has a way of letting the paying public know what is up with their product, Version Changes, bug fixes, etc....Smarthome, this is a SEVERE weakness on your part and a horrible way to do business.

Off topic:
I am in RadioRA and UPB overload...I hate reinventing the wheel. $3 Home Depot toggles are almost starting to look appealing again...