@jared-wiltshire said in Binary Output Priority Array in BACnet and Command Null:

@techalton Phillip does not work at Infinite Automation any more.
Can you please clearly describe what you are trying to achieve. Please detail your current setup (details about your dashboards, data source, etc) and what exactly is not working the way you want.

Hi @Jared-Wiltshire

can we read BACnet priority array status as image above?

@techalton said in Binary Output Priority Array in BACnet and Command Null:

@phildunlap said in Binary Output Priority Array in BACnet and Command Null:

To question 1, I am not sure what you mean the template for the priority array. You should be able to read the priority array into Mango, but it may require some additional processing to get it from a string representation to whatever representation would be suited to your use

hi Phil Dunlap,

Regards to question 1 how to read priority array and can we control more than 1 priority array...if can pls advise us Tq

Any update ?

@phildunlap said in Binary Output Priority Array in BACnet and Command Null:

To question 1, I am not sure what you mean the template for the priority array. You should be able to read the priority array into Mango, but it may require some additional processing to get it from a string representation to whatever representation would be suited to your use

hi Phil Dunlap,

Regards to question 1 how to read priority array and can we control more than 1 priority array...if can pls advise us Tq

@terrypacker Now the new version working fine. I'm able to detect all my BACnet devices. thank you for your support.

hello Phillip

@phildunlap said in ES version bacnet module 3.6.0 issue compare ver. 3.5.2:

Hi techalton,

Yes, we were able to replicate the issue and reached out to the developer who was working on the changes between BACnet4J 4 and 5, which is predominantly work toward getting a BACnet BTL Compliance certification.

The cause is that the device in question deviates from the BACnet specification with regards to the data type of its protocol version (section 12.11 specifies the protocol version to be an unsigned integer). The device in question provides a character string as its protocol version, The BTL specification stipulates how to respond to deviations from the specification, but I have not had access to the BTL compliance specification to ensure this is intended behavior, and the developer who did the work has not yet responded.

any update from your developer?

hello Phillip

@phildunlap said in ES version bacnet module 3.6.0 issue compare ver. 3.5.2:

Thanks for being persistent, techalton, we are examining the files and information you submitted.

any update?

@cwangv said in ES version BACnet module 3.6.0 issue compare ver. 3.5.2:

Phil
some BACnet/IP devices won't respond to broadcast of 255.255.255.255. They only respond to local subnet broadcast requests. Hence the need to change the broadcast address to 192.168.69.255.
I hope the above would help @techalton

Thanks for sharing @cwangv. when I change the broadcast address to 192.168.69.255.im unable to scan any device at all

@phildunlap said in ES version bacnet module 3.6.0 issue compare ver. 3.5.2:

Were the wireshark captures provided from the same discovery attempts as the six images posted here?

Perhaps you can modify your Mango/classes/log4j2.xml file to log BACnet4J at trace level for the course of the test, and then send in the Mango/logs/ma.log file and wireshark from an attempted discovery in 3.6

Add near similar tags close to the bottom of log4j2.xml:
<AsyncLogger includeLocation="true" name="com.serotonin.bacnet4j" level="trace"/>

You can then either restart Mango or reload them on the /ui/administration/log4j-reset page, if the Log4J reset module is installed.

Until I have reason to suspect Mango as the cause of these discovery issues, we would assess an hourly support fee for any direct assistance.

hello Phillip

On Wireshark and ma.log I'm able to see device 1003 but on the mango UI I'm unable to see the device.i have emailed the ma.log and Wireshark file to you

thanks.

@phildunlap said in ES version bacnet module 3.6.0 issue compare ver. 3.5.2:

Also I notice we only see one bind address for any of these discoveries. While I wouldn't expect that to be the issue 1003 isn't in your images from 3.6 despite it being in the wireshark responding in exactly the same manner as it did in 3.5 . Can you confirm the local device configuration is the same in both versions? Can you try using a bind address of 0.0.0.0 ?

hello Phillip

sorry for the late reply I have tried bind address 0.0.0.0 and still I'm unable to scan device 1003

thanks.

@phildunlap said in ES version BACnet module 3.6.0 issue compare ver. 3.5.2:

Also I notice we only see one bind address for any of these discoveries. While I wouldn't expect that to be the issue 1003 isn't in your images from 3.6 despite it being in the wireshark responding in exactly the same manner as it did in 3.5 . Can you confirm the local device configuration is the same in both versions? Can you try using a bind address of 0.0.0.0 ?

can we arrange a remote view session via Teamviewer to our pc...please let us know the time and date? when u are free. thank you