Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

IDlock 150 - No binding for door state #5739

Closed
brujoand opened this issue Feb 1, 2022 · 16 comments
Closed

IDlock 150 - No binding for door state #5739

brujoand opened this issue Feb 1, 2022 · 16 comments

Comments

@brujoand
Copy link

brujoand commented Feb 1, 2022

Describe the bug

According to this specification

<attribute id="0x0003" name="Door state" type="enum8" access="r" required="m">
we should be reading the attribute 0x0003 from cluster 0x1010 which shows the door state. However when adding the IDlock there are only bindings for battery status and lockstate (locked unlocked).

Steps to reproduce the behavior

Add the lock using the deconz webapp
curl the api to see that only data for battery and lock state are presented
-->

Expected behavior

There should afaik be a binding of the door state aswell to say wether it is closed, open, jammed etc..

Screenshots

N/A

Environment

Phoscon: 2.14.00 / 18/12/2021
Deconz: v2.14.0-beta

  • Host system: PC
  • Running method: Kubernetes / Docker
  • Firmware version: 26660700
  • deCONZ version: v2.14.0-beta
  • Device: ConBee II
  • Do you use an USB extension cable: yes
  • Is there any other USB or serial devices connected to the host system? If so: Which? No

deCONZ Logs

Nothing that looks interesting

Additional context

N/A

@Mimiix
Copy link
Collaborator

Mimiix commented Feb 1, 2022

Whats the model ID / Manufacturer name of this device?

@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 1, 2022

It's this one: #3827
https://idlock.no/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/User-Manual-Zigbee-module_EN_v0.4.pdf

Product name: ID-Lock
Manufacturer: Id-lock
Model identifier: 150

@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 1, 2022

I guess Datek is technically the manufacturer id, as they produce the zigbee module for the lock.

@Mimiix
Copy link
Collaborator

Mimiix commented Feb 1, 2022

Please read the Basic cluster for it on your device if you can.

@Mimiix
Copy link
Collaborator

Mimiix commented Feb 1, 2022

@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 1, 2022

Screenshot 2022-02-01 at 15 37 28

Sure, that should be this one right?

@Mimiix
Copy link
Collaborator

Mimiix commented Feb 1, 2022

No, i want the basic cluster :)

@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 1, 2022

Screenshot 2022-02-01 at 15 40 21

Ah right, that was the door lock cluster. Gotcha.

@Mimiix
Copy link
Collaborator

Mimiix commented Feb 1, 2022

Almost there :) Can you please click " read" ?

We need those Manu name and model ID to show up.

@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 1, 2022

haha... I was a facepalming as I posted it.. I need more coffee.
Screenshot 2022-02-01 at 15 42 13
.

@Mimiix
Copy link
Collaborator

Mimiix commented Feb 1, 2022

@Smanar Is the above device implemented by you already? If so, i have to forward @brujoand to the forums. Not sure if this is a newer version or not.

@Smanar
Copy link
Collaborator

Smanar commented Feb 1, 2022

The PR is here since May 2021 #4876
So If I m right ATM the API don't support the doorlock state.

You have it on your device JSON ?

@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 1, 2022

Nope, I can only find the value in the phoscon app,

{
  "config": {
    "battery": 90,
    "lock": false,
    "on": true,
    "reachable": true
  },
  "ep": 1,
  "etag": "e6de70ee105a141b51a1ad82dbc90d81",
  "lastannounced": "2022-02-01T13:03:33Z",
  "lastseen": "2022-02-01T14:07Z",
  "manufacturername": "Datek",
  "modelid": "ID Lock 150",
  "name": "Hoveddøra",
  "state": {
    "lastupdated": "2022-02-01T13:07:09.197",
    "lockstate": "unlocked"
  },
  "swversion": "0.7",
  "type": "ZHADoorLock",
  "uniqueid": "68:0a:e2:ff:fe:6b:b8:26-01-0101"
}

@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 2, 2022

@Smanar seems like your PR would solve my problem perfectly. Is there any reason why it hasn't been merged?

@Mimiix
Copy link
Collaborator

Mimiix commented Feb 2, 2022

@brujoand #5733

@Mimiix Mimiix linked a pull request Feb 2, 2022 that will close this issue
@brujoand
Copy link
Author

brujoand commented Feb 2, 2022

Oh, just read the ddf proposal. Looks like a good approach 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants