开云体育

"Many to one" EISC

Heath Volmer #179617 Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath
delcrestron All Messages By This Member #179619 I've done this with UDP sockets in SIMPL+. As I remember, I had to use a temp string that was defined as ASCII because otherwise it was inserting \x00 between each byte at the receiving end. Mark On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: ** Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Neil Dorin All Messages By This Member #179626 There was a prodigy multicast symbol I used a while back for this purpose exactly. Don't know if its still around... toggle quoted message Show quoted text On 2013-05-21, at 10:39 AM, Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath
matt_rasmussen_2000 All Messages By This Member #179641 I believe a TCP/IP server socket with the address of 0.0.0.0 will allow any IP address to connect to it, then do what you will with clients from the other processors. toggle quoted message Show quoted text --- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath
Heath Volmer #179642 Isn't the server socket a one-at-a-time thing though? On May 21, 2013, at 1:45 PM, matt_rasmussen_2000 <mjrtoo@...> wrote: I believe a TCP/IP server socket with the address of 0.0.0.0 will allow any IP address to connect to it, then do what you will with clients from the other processors. --- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
matt_rasmussen_2000 All Messages By This Member #179643 Couldn't you disconnect the sockets when you're not using them? toggle quoted message Show quoted text --- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: Isn't the server socket a one-at-a-time thing though? On May 21, 2013, at 1:45 PM, matt_rasmussen_2000 <mjrtoo@...> wrote: I believe a TCP/IP server socket with the address of 0.0.0.0 will allow any IP address to connect to it, then do what you will with clients from the other processors. --- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@> wrote: Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Heath Volmer #179644 Yes, but if I need two things to talk to it simultaneously - like multiple CCROSS into a source device's ECROSS. Yet another area where network-enabled crosspoints would be dandy... toggle quoted message Show quoted text On May 21, 2013, at 1:57 PM, "matt_rasmussen_2000" <mjrtoo@...> wrote: Couldn't you disconnect the sockets when you're not using them?
matt_rasmussen_2000 All Messages By This Member #179645 I do believe I have done a UDP subnet broadcast and had other processors receive that as well too, but that could get even more messy than managing client connections as in the previous reply. toggle quoted message Show quoted text --- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: Isn't the server socket a one-at-a-time thing though? On May 21, 2013, at 1:45 PM, matt_rasmussen_2000 <mjrtoo@...> wrote: I believe a TCP/IP server socket with the address of 0.0.0.0 will allow any IP address to connect to it, then do what you will with clients from the other processors. --- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@> wrote: Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lincoln King-Cliby All Messages By This Member #179646 UDP aimed at the broadcast address for your (sub)network, e.g. 10.0.0.255 for 10.0.0.0/24 Haven't tried it with a Crestron processor though... Lincoln -- Lincoln King-Cliby, CTS Sr. Systems Architect \| Crestron Certified Master Programmer (Silver) ControlWorks Consulting, LLC V: 440.449.1100 x1107 \| F: 440.449.1106 \| I: Crestron Services Provider toggle quoted message Show quoted text -----Original Message----- From: Crestron@... [mailto:Crestron@...] On Behalf Of Heath Volmer Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 4:00 PM To: Crestron@... Subject: Re: [Crestron] Re: "Many to one" EISC Yes, but if I need two things to talk to it simultaneously - like multiple CCROSS into a source device's ECROSS. Yet another area where network-enabled crosspoints would be dandy... On May 21, 2013, at 1:57 PM, "matt_rasmussen_2000" <mjrtoo@...> wrote: Couldn't you disconnect the sockets when you're not using them? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers. A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area. Yahoo! Groups Links
matt_rasmussen_2000 All Messages By This Member #179647 Probably easier to just do the IPID changes rather than figure out something that might work. :-) Also, you can import EISC symbols into other programs, so if you didn't know that, that might save some time defining stuff in the destination processor. toggle quoted message Show quoted text --- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: Yes, but if I need two things to talk to it simultaneously - like multiple CCROSS into a source device's ECROSS. Yet another area where network-enabled crosspoints would be dandy... On May 21, 2013, at 1:57 PM, "matt_rasmussen_2000" <mjrtoo@...> wrote: Couldn't you disconnect the sockets when you're not using them?
Kool-Aid Drinker #179649 XSIG through a UDP symbol. Just tested with two programs on a CP3N and one on a CP2e. Fine and dandy, with the exception that the two CP2N programs didn't exchange data. On Tue, 21 May 2013 16:01:01 -0400, Lincoln King-Cliby <lincoln@...> wrote: UDP aimed at the broadcast address for your (sub)network, e.g. 10.0.0.255 for 10.0.0.0/24 Haven't tried it with a Crestron processor though... Lincoln
Kool-Aid Drinker #179650 Avoid the prodigy multicast module! It's another of those cases (like the original iPhone symbol) where an intern invented a protocol and implemented it poorly in S+. On Tue, 21 May 2013 11:49:09 -0600, Neil Dorin <neildorin@...> wrote: There was a prodigy multicast symbol I used a while back for this purpose exactly. Don't know if its still around... Sent from my iPhone On 2013-05-21, at 10:39 AM, Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote: Is there a way to do something like a many-to-one EISC? Several different processors could all monitor/control the status of one EISC (or similar) on another processor. Seems stupid to define many EISCs on the "one" end. Multicast.... Thanks, Heath

Previous Topic Next Topic