Unsupported Devices in Link Tables

[upstatemike]

I just want to be sure I understsand what happens when the link table of a switch contains links to a device that is not supported by ISY. I know that not all SimpleHomenet products will be supported and there is also a PLM based touchscreen coming out soon, and of course Homeseer creates links with it's PLM.

 

If ISY finds links to these unsupported devices in the link table of a switch are they ignored? Or is there a chance they will be overwritten at some point as ISY edits the switches link table?

[MikeB]

Would it be possible for the ISY-26 to have a 'dummy device' that we could add so that way it doesn't overwrite links to foreign PLMs (and other devices)?

 

I'd personally love everything to integrate directly with the ISY-26, but unfortunately some devices do not. Even though it's been on hold for months, I plan on resurrecting my CQC project sometime soon. CQC interfaces with Insteon through a PLM.

[Michel Kohanim]

upstatemike,

 

Your questions is too general so let answer it in two sections:

1. What happens when you link a device to ISY

2. What happens if, after you have alraedy linked a device to ISY, you manually link another device to it

 

In case 1:

You have a choice: you can bring in all the existing links and ISY will keep them for you. But, since ISY does NOT know what they are, nor does it know how to represent them, it will never allow you to remove and/or modify them. Now, if you remove/modify these links using an alternative method, then ISY would NOT know anything about what you did and continues thinking that they are as they were

 

In case 2:

ISY will not be privy to what you do to any device after it has already been linked to ISY, unless you go through ISY. So, assuming that you have configured all your devices using ISY, and then you get the touch screen, and you also link all your devices into the PLM on your touch screen then:

1. ISY will NOT know anything about the slave links in your devices to the new PLM (that's the only way that the touch screen can control your device)

2. If you add that device to a new scene in ISY, then since ISY does not know anything about the extra link, it will overwrite it

 

We do acknowledge that ISY is not the BE IT ALL nor have we ever aspired to be. As such, we would love to integrate with any third party solution within limits:

1. What we do has to be supported by the underlying protocol. i.e. if INSTEON does not explicitly specify the cases where two "generic and un-documented" devices should link and behave, then we will not "invent" our own solution. This said, however, we would surely (as we have done so many times) suggest solutions and hope that they will be implemented and incorporated into the protocol

2. We prefer to promote communications via Web Services and TCP/IP rather than physical connections. This will give us the flexibility to implement solutions quickly (i.e. ELK integration in less than a week) + extensibility for the future generation of devices most of which will be network enabled

 

MikeB,

 

Adding/maintaining dummy nodes in ISY goes against the first principle above. The main reasons are:

1. If they are dummy, we don't know what they are capable of doing (on/off/wash/open/close/volume/up/down/ring/smoke/zone/temperature/setpoint, and all the different supported actions in INSTEON specification)

2. If we don't know what they are capable of doing, then we cannot explain them

3. If we cannot explain them, we cannot document them

4. If we cannot document them, we cannot train our staff to handle the support issues

 

In short, I think it'll be better to have an INSTEON specification specifically for these cases (even if a draft) so that, at the least, what we do is official rather than one-off, proprietary, short-lived, and a maintenance nightmare.

 

Thanks so very much,

With kind regards,

Michel

[upstatemike]

We do acknowledge that ISY is not the BE IT ALL nor have we ever aspired to be. As such, we would love to integrate with any third party solution within limits:

1. What we do has to be supported by the underlying protocol. i.e. if INSTEON does not explicitly specify the cases where two "generic and un-documented" devices should link and behave, then we will not "invent" our own solution. This said, however, we would surely (as we have done so many times) suggest solutions and hope that they will be implemented and incorporated into the protocol

2. We prefer to promote communications via Web Services and TCP/IP rather than physical connections. This will give us the flexibility to implement solutions quickly (i.e. ELK integration in less than a week) + extensibility for the future generation of devices most of which will be network enabled

 

Thanks so very much,

With kind regards,

Michel

 

Thanks Michael. It looks like Insteon is about to hit a development brick wall since most new devices coming out are based on the PLM and it does not look like there is any strategy for them all to play well together. Certainly no way to manage them all centrally. This is a very discouraging situation.

[Michel Kohanim]

upstatemike,

 

I agree with you that this is a little discouraging but I am a little optimistic since there are quite a few very helpful people at SmartLabs who would make sure things get implemented if the business justification exists. Also:

I am sure we'll find a way to integrate with the touch-screen. They do have a brilliant solution for a small installation with one touch-screen (multiple PLMs). But, they will run into the same issue (as with ISY) as soon as you want to add another touch-screen. So, I am confident that not only the touch-screen integration will add value to ISY/INSTEON, ISY will add value to the touch-screen solution for larger installations.

 

All it takes is the willingness to cooperate and I remain optimistic.

 

Also, as I promised, I did contact HomeSeer and had a very pleasant chat with the president. What we have to do is to simply create a HomeSeer plugin. Due to shortage of resources on our side, this is not going to happen immediately. Do you know of any HomeSeer developers who might be able to/interested in creating an ISY plugin for HomeSeer?

 

This would certainly be much more efficient since:

a. We wouldn't have to assign resources to learn HomeSeer

b. The Plugin Developer may choose to charge for each one sold

c. This will get done much quicker since the learning curve is lower

If you know of anyone, please do let me know.

 

With kind regards,

Michel

 

Thanks Michael. It looks like Insteon is about to hit a development brick wall since most new devices coming out are based on the PLM and it does not look like there is any strategy for them all to play well together. Certainly no way to manage them all centrally. This is a very discouraging situation.

[MikeB]

Thanks for the update Michel! You and the ISY-26 have convinced me that the ISY-26 should be the center of the Insteon universe. Every controller type device should communicate through it, and the ISY-26 should communicate to the Insteon network through the PLM.

 

That would make things a heck of a lot easier.

 

To anyone who doesn't want to buy an ISY-26, I say "screw 'em".

[Michel Kohanim]

MikeB,

 

Thanks so very much for your vote of confidence. We would do anything in power to make INSTEON/ISY a success. I am sure there are a lot of other like-minded people out there who believe that we make INSTEON a success if and only if we cooperated. Again, I remain optimistic.

 

Thanks again and with kind regards,

Michel

 

Thanks for the update Michel! You and the ISY-26 have convinced me that the ISY-26 should be the center of the Insteon universe. Every controller type device should communicate through it, and the ISY-26 should communicate to the Insteon network through the PLM.

 

That would make things a heck of a lot easier.

 

To anyone who doesn't want to buy an ISY-26, I say "screw 'em".

[upstatemike]

upstatemike,

Do you know of any HomeSeer developers who might be able to/interested in creating an ISY plugin for HomeSeer?

 

 

Unfortunately I do not know of anyone. I will continue to try to convince the Homeseer folks that it would be in their own best interest to support the ISY-26 by developing a plugin with Homeseer staff.

[Michel Kohanim]

upstatemike,

 

Thanks so very much. That would be the ultimate solution!

 

With kind regards,

Michel

upstatemike,

Do you know of any HomeSeer developers who might be able to/interested in creating an ISY plugin for HomeSeer?

 

 

Unfortunately I do not know of anyone. I will continue to try to convince the Homeseer folks that it would be in their own best interest to support the ISY-26 by developing a plugin with Homeseer staff.

[MikeB]

Unfortunately I do not know of anyone. I will continue to try to convince the Homeseer folks that it would be in their own best interest to support the ISY-26 by developing a plugin with Homeseer staff.

 

I've tried to do the same with CQC. Unfortunately, I haven't had much luck. Really sucks because my time and money investment in CQC has so far been wasted.

[upstatemike]

Unfortunately I do not know of anyone. I will continue to try to convince the Homeseer folks that it would be in their own best interest to support the ISY-26 by developing a plugin with Homeseer staff.

 

I've tried to do the same with CQC. Unfortunately, I haven't had much luck. Really sucks because my time and money investment in CQC has so far been wasted.

 

Unfortunately the Homeseer folks are not at all receptive, preferring to put their faith in SmartHome to come up with an easy interface for them to program to (sure that will happen!)

 

I am now rethinking my overall automation platform strategy.

[MikeB]

I am now rethinking my overall automation platform strategy.

 

I'm constantly re-thinking mine.

 

Do you have an Elk M1? I just purchased one, and am hoping it will serve as a good bridge between CQC and the ISY-26 for me.

[upstatemike]

I am now rethinking my overall automation platform strategy.

 

I'm constantly re-thinking mine.

 

Do you have an Elk M1? I just purchased one, and am hoping it will serve as a good bridge between CQC and the ISY-26 for me.

 

I have an Elk panel but have not installed it yet... (well I have hung the boxes and inserted 5 Input expanders and a relay board, but have not powered it up yet.) It will make a good security/fire panel but it does not have the memory or the logic to be my main controller (no OR statements, no math functions to massage counter values, etc.) I may have to leave a lot of stuff on my Stargate.

 

Elk M1/ISY = lighting, fire, security, motion sensors, temp sensors

 

Stargate = Tstats, voice alerts/warnings/status/reminders, phone stuff, X10

 

Stargate ISY

 

Or maybe

 

Stargate PC ISY

[MikeB]

I have mine sitting on my bench, hopefully get to play with it sometime soon.