I found that the RFX9600 Ethernet port is sending 10M half duplex NLPs. Does anyone know what Ethernet speeds the RFX9600 is supposed to support and if the RFX9600 is supposed to support 100M full duplex, whether this is an issue with the latest firmware 1.3.8?

The RFX9600 is a 10M device.

The ethernet link of the RFX9600 is 10Mbps half-duplex. This has nothing to do with the firmware version.

I'm getting "Command Failed" occasionally when using my TS9400 with an RFX9600. I just wanted to confirm that auto-negotiation is working properly in my switch: the RFX9600 is 10Mbps half-duplex, right? That's what @Sogliphy mentioned in an old posting. I wanted to confirm in the RFX9600's technical specifications, but it's not actually mentioned.

I too get command failed occasionally and some really weird things happening where RFX is delayed 3-4 seconds when executing commands.

I thought this was due in part to lots of UDP traffic on the network. However, I just did a firmware reload of RFX9600 and a complete firmware reload to TSU9600 and so far, things are better.

Sorry for the load of questions below, but I think we need answers to have better idea of where to go next.


You did not mention the firmware versions you have on the RFX and TSU. Please list those out as I've seen command failed happen more when using the 7.3.3 TSU9600 firmware with RFX9600 1.4.7 firmware.

And finally, what type of networking are you using?

What are your network settings in PEP?
WPA2, WEP, or 100% unprotected?
How long is network kept active - 2 hours, 4 hours?

Perhaps is a DHCP lease expiring on you? i.e. did you configure DHCP or Fixed IP on the TSU?
Did you configured Fixed IP for the extenders in PEP?
Is the RFX configured for DHCP or is it a fixed IP?

Details of my environment are in "==Firmware/Network details==" further below.

Problem: About 20% of the IR Commands that my TSU9400 sends were result in "Command Failed". The diagnostic screen says "0450 Extender 2 didn't reply". It seems that the "Command Failed" result mainly from IR commands, and much less so (or not at all) with RS-232 commands. It was strange that Nvidia Shield IR commands resulted in more Command Failed than Apple TV IR commands. EDIT: I checked the hex codes. The Nvidia Shield IR commands (uses Flirc) are maybe 10x longer than the Apple TV hex codes, which could explain why "Command Failed" was much more prevalent with Shield than Apple TV.

I have 3 RFX9600's, but I only need 1. I tried using the other 2 RFX9600's, but I was still getting "Command Failed" with them. So, I didn't bother trying to reload the firmware (doubt I have a need-to-reload-firmware issue given that all 3 get "Command Failed" errors).

Anyway, I remembered that a long time ago, I had changed the Cisco switch's port that my RFX9600 is plugged into from Auto-negotiate to be manually configured to 10Mb full duplex. I thought there was an auto-negotiation problem, since I didn't believe that the RFX9600 would be a half duplex device. But I found @Sogliphy's old post above that said that the RFX9600 is actually a half duplex device. I couldn't confirm this since none of the RFX9600 documentation says whether it's half or full duplex.

So, I changed my switch's port back to Auto-negotiate, and rebooted the RFX9600. It auto-negotiated to 10 Mbps, half duplex. But, I was still getting Command Failed. I left it as auto-negotiate. Then, I went to the Pronto software's "Configure Extenders" page, and explicitly checked "Use fixed IP address" and entered the RFX9600's address. I read in some other thread that explicitly specifying the IP address prevents the need to rely on multicast.

Anyway, after the two changes (auto-negotiate, and explicitly specifying the RFX9600's IP address), performance is much better. Now, only about 1% to 2% of IR commands sent result in "Command Failed" (down from 20% before I made these two changes).

So, I'll keep testing to see if "Command Failed" continues to be a relatively rare occurrence. I had rebooted the RFX9600, my Wi-Fi access point, and RFX9600, so I'll have to see as time goes on whether "Command Failed" will continue to be relatively rare.

I'm wondering if it's worth trying to other things to see if I can further decrease the possibility of "Command Failed" (although if it stays at or below 2% failure, it's still a big improvement from before):

1. Have my access point broadcast the SSID. Currently, the SSID is hidden. I hid it years ago as a false sense of security (only Pronto remotes use this SSID). I read in some other thread that hiding the SSID may increase problems when the Pronto first wakes up.

2. I still use RS-232 for a couple of my devices. Interestingly, it seems that I get Command Failed mostly (or maybe all the time?) with IR commands. RS-232 commands don't fail. So, I'm wondering if maybe I can get better performance if I continue to use my RFX9600 for RS-232, but use an RFX9400 (which I have in storage) for IR commands. There was another thread where someone was also getting Command Failed issues, and decided to use an RFX9400 for IR and IIRC they kept the RFX9600 for non-IR commands.


==== Firmware/Networking details =====

Network access point: 2.4 GHz, WEP, hidden SSID, b + g + n, Channel 11

RFX9600: Uses DHCP reservation

Pronto TSU9400 Network settings:
Wireless Timeout: Two Hours,
Channel 11, use DHCP reservation,
Encryption: WEP128 (using WPA too slow)

Pronto TSU Application version: 7.3.3
Pronto TSU IR firmware: 4.0.29

RFX9600 firmware: 1.4.8 (EDIT: I checked my old notes, and I did update to 1.4.8 beta. I also found my old posting from 2011: [Link: remotecentral.com] .

I suggest to put RFX back to 1.4.7 and then clean up your NVIDIA IR Codes if you can.

Post an example of a long code here if you don't know how to work this through IR Scrutininzer.

To summarize, I made two changes two days ago:
(1) I changed the Cisco switch port that the RFX9600 uses to auto-negotiate. The port auto-negotiated to 10 Mbps, Half duplex. Previously, I had incorrectly configured the Port to 10 Mbps, Full duplex. Apparently, I incorrectly assumed that the RFX9600 is a full duplex device and changed it a while back.
(2) Then, I went to the Pronto Extenders page and explicitly specified the IP address of the RFX9600.

Only making one of these 2 changes didn't help, but making BOTH these changes has helped a lot. I did more testing today, and I was able to press the Apple cursor keys 100 times with no Command Failed errors. I pressed the Shield keys 100 times, and got 2 Command Failed errors. After each failure, I press a cursor key a second later, and it succeeds.

I've been using 1.4.8 for years (since around 2010 or 2011), so for now, I'll leave it at 1.4.8, since my recent Command Fail issues are more recent (and from an old posting of mine, I had Command Failed issues with 1.4.7: [Link: remotecentral.com] ).

So, anyway, the failure rate of Nvidia commands are higher than Apple TV commands. Even before I made the 2 aforementioned changes, the Apple TV commands more reliable than the Shield commands. IIRC, RS-232 commands to other devices (processor and projector) always worked, and performance of my TSU9400's RS232 commands seem faster than IR commands.

I have the Nvidia Shield TV Pro (2019). It doesn't actually support IR directly, so what I did was buy a Flirc USB stick, and I programmed it using the Nvidia Shield 2017 IR commands ([Link: forum.flirc.tv] ).

I posted some of my commonly-used Nvidia Shield commands below in case you have any suggestions.

Note: in my testing of the Apple TV and Nvidia Shield cursor keys, their pages had a page script that ran every 20 seconds, which calls com.philips.HttpLibrary.getHTTPXML(). The response is processed asynchronously. I assume that calling getHTTPXML() shouldn't impact sending IR key commands?

Other question: I have some page scripts that call serial.match synchronously every couple of seconds. I call serial.timeout with timeout value of 200ms. I don't define onData and onError handlers. The user might issue some IR commands in these pages. The IR commands and RS-232 commands use the same RFX9600. Is there any benefit (in terms of reliability) if I use an RFX9400 (or a second RFX9600) solely for IR commands and an RFX9600 dedicated only for sending serial commands? A couple of old threads had me considering this:

[Link: remotecentral.com]

[Link: remotecentral.com]

Thanks.

Cursor Down
========

0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0622 015B 0057 0016 0E6C


Cursor Left
=======

0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0622 015B 0057 0016 0E6C


Cursor Right
========

0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0622 015B 0057 0016 0E6C


Cursor Up
=======

0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0622 015B 0057 0016 0E6C

Ok
==

0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0622 015B 0057 0016 0E6C


Last
===

0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0622 015B 0057 0016 0E6C

Shield (Menu)
=========

0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0622 015B 0057 0016 0E6C

Sending serial commands in a page script might be causing your command failed. If you see extender busy in the diagnostics log. Backlight +menu+firm2 is the sequence to view, you might consider dedicating an extender to IR and one for 232. However you may still have issues as you are using blocking 232 commands. To truly check if this is your issue, turn off the repeats in your page scripts. If you can convert 232 to asynch and maybe use scheduleAfter things may improve. However having a timed operation can always interfere with execution of actions.

Thanks. The page scripts that I was testing IR commands from didn't do RS-232 calls. Only getHTTPXML() (which is called every 20 seconds). And when I did get "Command Failed", they were almost always "0450 Extender didn't reply". "Extender ... is busy" was rarer. Anyway, after I changed the RFX9600's Cisco switch port to autonegotiate, and I put the RFX9600's IP address in the Pronto configuration, performance is much better. I get from 0% to 2% failure rate for IR commands, more so with Shield IR commands than Apple TV IR compares (before those 2 changes, I was getting up to 20% failure rate earlier).

Now, I do have a couple of other pages that do RS-232 calls from a page script, so for those it may be worth using an RFX9400 for IR commands and the RFX9600 for RS-232 commands. I do have an RFX9400 (and 2 RFX9600) not being used currently (I reduced # of rooms I was using Pronto, and it's nice to have spares these days).