Does controller need it's UID and support any PIDs? - E1.20 RDM (Remote Device Management) Protocol Forums

ericthegeek · January 19th, 2016

That is a very strange behavior from the Enttec USB Box. I have no idea why that is happening. Might be worth an email to Enttec to ask, they are typically pretty responsive.

No, your controller does not have to respond to discovery or to any other PIDs. In fact, I would say that it should *not* respond to them. Controllers send GET, SET, and DISCOVERY requests. They should never send GET_RESPONSE, SET_RESPONSE, or DISCOVERY_RESPONSE packets.

Corner Case: You could hypothetically build a system that has a controller and one or more responders bolted inside the same chassis. To the outside world, this would look like both a controller and a responder.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
UID / EUID convertor	nomis52	RDM General Implementation Discussion	0	May 16th, 2015 11:50 AM
DISC_UNIQUE_BRANCH dest UID (section 7.3)	berntd	RDM Interpretation Questions	5	October 15th, 2008 09:06 PM

January 19th, 2016	#7
ericthegeek Task Group Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 390	That is a very strange behavior from the Enttec USB Box. I have no idea why that is happening. Might be worth an email to Enttec to ask, they are typically pretty responsive. No, your controller does not have to respond to discovery or to any other PIDs. In fact, I would say that it should not respond to them. Controllers send GET, SET, and DISCOVERY requests. They should never send GET_RESPONSE, SET_RESPONSE, or DISCOVERY_RESPONSE packets. Corner Case: You could hypothetically build a system that has a controller and one or more responders bolted inside the same chassis. To the outside world, this would look like both a controller and a responder.