Bug Report - CP Does not show Scanned Network Correctly

[dgrant]

6.0.0 and 6.0.0 I saw that when looking at the Lighting Networks Connected, I can see the one controller I currently have plugged in and its own network page does indeed come up when I touch its desktop shortcut. When I select Controller Setup, scan the physical network, it does not find it.

https://photos.google.com/photo/AF1QipMFbDSzTS2AzMv3CMfqZWF7erMSzZrgZ5SwVl6F

https://photos.google.com/photo/AF1QipMX2OU-vP1p7bs2q3rbTZllim9ZZN80XKeIqAxB

[k6ccc]

404 error on your images.  Make sure you shared them publicly.

 

[dgrant]

Oops

https://photos.app.goo.gl/9DY5DseGUyA6bXw3A

[k6ccc]

OK, that was pretty much what I was expecting, but the screen captures explains it.

Interesting.  Mine seems to be working fine.  Over the weekend, I powered up several additional E1.31 controllers and the scan found them just fine.  It also is finding my web server (I actually did not realize it was reachable on the E1.31 network), and the web interface for a network switch on that network.

 

[dgrant]

I suppose I could alter the LOR network to a more conventional address like 192.168.0.....instead of my 10.10.10.... retaining my 192.168.1.1 as the internet access network

[k6ccc]

Shouldn't make any difference.  You could always do it like I do and use 192.168.131.x.  Makes sense for the E1.31 network - and I can remember it :)

 

[k6ccc]

I will make a change of my statement.  What is the subnet mask for your 10.10.10.x network?  That address range allows up to a /8 (or 255.0.0.0 if you prefer) which would allow 16+ million addresses.  Might S6 be attempting to scan every address in the subnet?

 

[dgrant]

I use 10.10.10.100 for the LOR network and 10.10.10.10 thru 10.10.10.15 for the various controllers on that network

subnet 255.255.255.0

Edited July 7, 2022 by dgrant

[k6ccc]

So much for that idea...

 

[dgrant]

Still does not report finding the E682 controller on the one page for opening its own webpage but appears just fine on the status page...6.0.4

[dgrant]

I added an Alphapix16 to the network and it can't find it either, yet shows up on the status page and yes, its own webpage does come up directly from the desktop shortcut.

[dgrant]

I just connected a P12S from JoshuaSystems and magically, the CP found it. Can't see the others but this one works and it does launch its internal webpage.

Edited July 10, 2022 by dgrant

[dgrant]

So here in 6.0.6 now,  the network list of attached controllers, will only show my two P12S controllers. It will not show the E682, AlphaPix, yet they show up in the network list showing they are connected and running. It will launch the internal webpages of both P12S controllers but not the other two. Those other two are setup as E1.31 types. I tried to change the type to ArtNet but they still did not appear. Yes, they are on the correct scanned network. My two Pixcon16's appear normally via the Pixcon16 selector.

[dgrant]

This is the tale. You can see the networked controllers appearing on the left picture and they are all connected and communicating. The picture on the right, shows the only two that will launch their webpage. Two others are Pixcon16's and they work with their own special editor in the CP. The final two are one each, E682 and a AlphaPix16. Both have their own webpages and both can be manually launched but not from the CP since they do not list.

[MattBrown]

On 7/8/2022 at 1:53 PM, dgrant said:

Still does not report finding the E682 controller on the one page for opening its own webpage but appears just fine on the status page...6.0.4

The scan function checks for a valid web page before it adds an IP address to the results. Turns out the E682 doesn't follow HTTP protocol -- it doesn't include a status in its response (like "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"). Therefore, it was being omitted. Our next release will be more forgiving and the E682 will be included (and perhaps other controllers as well).

[k6ccc]

That has been a problem with the SanDevices controllers for a long time.

 

[dgrant]

Hopefully, whatever they change, will also fix the AlphaPix series and any others. The only reason I'm pursuing this is because its shown on the CP page as working therefore anyone new to this hobby, might have problems trying to figure out how to make things work when instead, its just a small thing, which it is. LOR knows full well, they can't sell software that doesn't work properly therefore they have us to test it for them!!

In regards to this minor issue, why not just allow the users to manually type in the IP address of the controller and allow it to appear as unverified.?

[dgrant]

This now works in 6.0.8. May I suggest we allow us to re-identify individual controller names? I've got one showing up now identified as User Login. Its an AlphaPix16

[MattBrown]

1 hour ago, dgrant said:

This now works in 6.0.8. May I suggest we allow us to re-identify individual controller names? I've got one showing up now identified as User Login. Its an AlphaPix16

This tool just reports whatever is in the <title> tag in the controller's web page. It is really just meant to quickly see what's out on the network without having to log into your router and find the DHCP client list (or having to remember your static IP assignments).

What might be useful is to have a way to initiate setting up a new E1.31 or Art-Net controller from here. Maybe indicate which ones are already set up and which ones are not? Would work if you are using unicast, but not multicast.

[dgrant]

Sounds like a good idea too me

[dgrant]

I was just thinking that it would be very nice to have the control panel display each and all, LOR serial controllers connected as in Rs-485. Much easier to see them in one place rather than having to go to the HU to scan. This way, during a show, if a connection fails, we can see it and investigate rather than shutting down the show. 

[TheDucks]

44 minutes ago, dgrant said:

I was just thinking that it would be very nice to have the control panel display each and all, LOR serial controllers connected as in Rs-485. Much easier to see them in one place rather than having to go to the HU to scan. This way, during a show, if a connection fails, we can see it and investigate rather than shutting down the show. 

Amen!

First off, it would show LOR ID in a (per dongle) matrix so you could easily see:

"What is that Pixie doing on the slow network" .

(Unintended) ID duplication (avoids confusion, even if it is valid).

And the ones expected, but not showing (AC fail, network gopher chomped...)

[dgrant]

Even better, allow us to put them in our own daisy-chain order. That would tell us instantly where the problem was. See a green light to say the 6th controller in line then red light at the 7th and beyond. As we know, controller ID# makes no difference to RS485 except for a limitation of 64 devices on a single cable/chain.

[TheDucks]

29 minutes ago, dgrant said:

Even better, allow us to put them in our own daisy-chain order. That would tell us instantly where the problem was. See a green light to say the 6th controller in line then red light at the 7th and beyond. As we know, controller ID# makes no difference to RS485 except for a limitation of 64 devices on a single cable/chain.

My controllers are far from being in ID order., let alone on their network cables in order. Even within the boxes, the order is close to when I bought that type of board. eg My megatree is #5, #7 and 40-43   (It started out with 9 AC strands on #1. It is now 16 Dumb and 2 smart strings). Almost all my other DC controller boxes have a CMB24 and a Pixie.)

[dgrant]

Also, I have LOR’s rs485 splitter, so I’m sending data out two directions.