E1.20 RDM (Remote Device Management) Protocol Forums - View Single Post - For developing a "not fast" RDM proxy hardware, use ACK_timer or other method?

yxj-ae86 · September 28th, 2025

Thanks for you reply.

Best user experience, do you mean response time? And if choose ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE, only add about 50-100ms, I think it is acceptable.

Our concern is that whether mainstream RDM controller support ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE, if most of them support it, I prefer ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE, because caching information from slaves during DMX512's transmission interval is not so easy done by PLC(power line communication). But if ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE is not common in RDK controller, caching solution is a better and only way to go.

September 28th, 2025	#3
yxj-ae86 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2025 Posts: 7	Thanks for you reply. Best user experience, do you mean response time? And if choose ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE, only add about 50-100ms, I think it is acceptable. Our concern is that whether mainstream RDM controller support ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE, if most of them support it, I prefer ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE, because caching information from slaves during DMX512's transmission interval is not so easy done by PLC(power line communication). But if ACK_TIMER+QUEUED_MESSAGE is not common in RDK controller, caching solution is a better and only way to go. Last edited by yxj-ae86; September 29th, 2025 at 12:10 AM.