¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Locked LT1017 - LT1020 #digitrax


 

With a Digitrax system, I'm aware that LT1017 to LT1020 are resevered for Loconet use, however is there any issue using LS or IS in this number range?
?
Thanks,
Darren


 

On 9/4/2024 10:37 PM, Darren F wrote:
With a Digitrax system, I'm aware that LT1017 to LT1020 are resevered for Loconet use, however is there any issue using LS or IS in this number range?
- "IS" numbers are not directly associated with any "LocoNet" address, so are not restricted by LocoNet limitations in _any way_. In general, JMRI objects with "system names" that _begin_ with "I" are _not_ associated with _any_ hardware interface, so shouldn't have restrictions for _any_ system-specific reason.

- _Any_ LocoNet device _may_ impose "issues" like those imposed for "LT1017-LT1020", as you mention. _Plus_ some other "LTx" addresses, too, that you haven't mentioned. But this sort of "LocoNet address restriction" is not limited to Turnouts! It can, and does, affect other LocoNet "address spaces".

As such, you need to "figure it out", based on which LocoNet hardware _you_ are using or will use in the future. Since LocoNet hardware _can_ use addresses in unexpected ways, the user _needs_ to look quite carefully at the appropriate documentation.

FYI: I am aware of Digitrax hardware having "special" addresses in the "Switch" (LT) address space, and in the "Signal Aspects" space, and in the "Transponding Zones" address space. At the moment, I cannot think of any Digitrax' LocoNet hardware which places any sort of limitation on the "general-purpose" sensor addresses.

Regards,
Billybob


 

Darren,

Totally separate address ranges. And the IS range is completely free
as it is JMRI internal.

-Ken Cameron, Member JMRI Dev Team
www.jmri.org
www.fingerlakeslivesteamers.org
www.cnymod.com


 

Thanks for the responses, confirmed my thoughts, just wanted to double check.
?
Darren


 

It is not my intent to highjack this thread, but OP has touched on a closely related topic.
?
Please excuse my ignorance, but where is the documentation for the statement, "I'm aware that LT1017 to LT1020 are reserved for LocoNet use?"
?
Our club layout expansion plans could easily reach into that range as most of the lower numbers have been parceled out into small clusters and we need several large blocks of contiguous addresses for the various yards.
?
We are well aware of the NMRA reserved turnout addresses, although I seem to have misplaced that reference information.?
?
Thanks in advance,
?
Cliff in Baja SoCal


 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Cliff,

Those are the Loconet Stationary Decoder Interrogation addresses.? They are in the Loconet spec, although it may say somewhat different numbers due to different interpretation of the bits in the messages.? The QuadLN manual documents this BTW.
Robin

Robin Becker
San Diego CA

Sep 6, 2024 12:14:31 PM Cliff Anderson <cliffaa@...>:

It is not my intent to highjack this thread, but OP has touched on a closely related topic.
?
Please excuse my ignorance, but where is the documentation for the statement, "I'm aware that LT1017 to LT1020 are reserved for LocoNet use?"
?
Our club layout expansion plans could easily reach into that range as most of the lower numbers have been parceled out into small clusters and we need several large blocks of contiguous addresses for the various yards.
?
We are well aware of the NMRA reserved turnout addresses, although I seem to have misplaced that reference information.?
?
Thanks in advance,
?
Cliff in Baja SoCal


 

On 9/6/2024 1:14 PM, Cliff Anderson wrote:

Please excuse my ignorance, but where is the documentation for the statement, "I 'm aware that LT1017 to LT1020 are reserved for LocoNet use?"
FWIW, my notes do not say that _any_ "LTxxx" address is "reserved". JMRI doesn't do anything to "reserve" any LocoNet address.

JMRI _interprets_ some LocoNet messages with the switch" addresses between 1017-1020 as "Interrogation" commands. This can be seen in the "LocoNet Personal Edition" spec.

(But JMRI also interprets the "switch" addresses between 2041-2044 as "Interrogate" messages. I wonder why, because this does not seem to be accurate...)

Our club layout expansion plans could easily reach into that range as most of the lower numbers have been parceled out into small clusters and we need several large blocks of contiguous addresses for the various yards.
If you need huge numbers of switches, perhaps you should implement an additional "LocoNet", for those devices that do _not_ need to be controlled via a throttle... JMRI can easily handle multiple LocoNet connections...

We are well aware of the NMRA reserved turnout addresses, although I seem to have misplaced that reference information.
I believe this is covered in NMRA "Standard" S-9.2.1, Section 2.4.3.

Regards,
Billybob


 

Thank you Robin and Billybob.
?
In fact we are implanting a second control bus.?
?
Extra caution seemed worth the effort for future maintenance and possible modifications.?
?
Cliff
?