Skip to content
  • MySensors
  • OpenHardware.io
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. Bug Reports
  3. Getting weird replies from serial gw, trying to send acks through random non-existing nodes.

Getting weird replies from serial gw, trying to send acks through random non-existing nodes.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Bug Reports
10 Posts 3 Posters 3.2k Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Offline
    S Offline
    Stric
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Hello.
    I currently have a serial gw connected to an rpi2, then using a custom controller. Recently, I've been getting some weird stuff from it.. For example:

    I have a router node at id 251, that sends "Hi!" every 30 minutes or so - just to show that it's alive..
    0;0;3;0;9;read: 251-251-0 s=251,c=1,t=25,pt=0,l=3:Hi!
    0;0;3;0;9;send: 0-0-225-251 s=251,c=1,t=25,pt=0,l=3,st=fail:Hi!

    If I'm interpreting this right, I got a message from 251, originating from 251, final destination 0 (the gw) with "Hi!", and then it wanted to send the ack from 0, via 225 to final destination 251. This failed, since I don't have and have never had a node 225.

    Just today, I've had these failed replies (tuple, count):
    '0-0-1-4' => 1215,
    '0-0-1-7' => 1168,
    '0-0-117-251' => 1,
    '0-0-225-251' => 248,
    '0-0-30-30' => 51,
    '0-0-39-20' => 233,
    '0-0-40-20' => 53,
    '0-0-41-20' => 127,
    '0-0-64-251' => 22,
    '0-0-66-251' => 1,
    '0-0-96-251' => 2,
    '0-0-97-251' => 2

    Unfortunately, the nodes I have up and running is 4, 7, 8, 20, 21, 30 and the router at 251. I have not received any message from any rougue/neighbor nodes (like 41, 66, 96 etc), out of the more than half a million messages I have statistics for.

    Corrupted routing table? Thinking about writing something to dump the routing table to the controller..

    /Tomas

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • hekH Offline
      hekH Offline
      hek
      Admin
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Could it be a failing eeprom?

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Offline
        S Offline
        Stric
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Maybe..

        Replaced it at 00:00 with same code, let's see what new statistics say after a good nights sleep ;)

        I haven't looked at the code around there, but it wouldn't be that hard to dump out the routing table - right?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • hekH Offline
          hekH Offline
          hek
          Admin
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Nope. You could just read it out. Look here for the start address:
          https://github.com/mysensors/Arduino/blob/master/libraries/MySensors/MySensor.h#L51

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • S Offline
            S Offline
            Stric
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            0 weird replies since replacement of gateway, 8.5 hours in.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • S Offline
              S Offline
              Stric
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              20150607 isn't over yet, but statistics from the last couple of days and so-far of today (20150607, arduino got replaced at 00:00 today):

              20150603
              sendfail
              $VAR1 = {
                        '0-0-1-4' => 57,
                        '0-0-225-251' => 13,
                        '0-0-251-20' => 271,
                        '0-0-251-251' => 188,
                        '0-0-251-7' => 487,
                        '0-0-30-30' => 5,
                        '0-0-4-4' => 1205,
                        '0-0-7-7' => 537
                      };
              20150604
              sendfail
              $VAR1 = {
                        '0-0-1-4' => 1267,
                        '0-0-1-7' => 598,
                        '0-0-160-251' => 1,
                        '0-0-160-255' => 6,
                        '0-0-2-255' => 1,
                        '0-0-225-251' => 268,
                        '0-0-255-255' => 2,
                        '0-0-30-30' => 4,
                        '0-0-39-20' => 102,
                        '0-0-40-20' => 79,
                        '0-0-41-20' => 91,
                        '0-0-50-20' => 2,
                        '0-0-53-255' => 1,
                        '0-0-55-20' => 1,
                        '0-0-64-251' => 16,
                        '0-0-66-251' => 2,
                        '0-0-96-251' => 4
                      };
              20150605
              sendfail
              $VAR1 = {
                        '0-0-1-4' => 1247,
                        '0-0-1-7' => 879,
                        '0-0-117-251' => 2,
                        '0-0-160-251' => 1,
                        '0-0-225-251' => 268,
                        '0-0-251-20' => 1,
                        '0-0-251-251' => 33,
                        '0-0-30-30' => 129,
                        '0-0-39-20' => 112,
                        '0-0-4-4' => 11,
                        '0-0-40-20' => 77,
                        '0-0-41-20' => 95,
                        '0-0-64-251' => 12,
                        '0-0-66-251' => 1,
                        '0-0-7-7' => 14,
                        '0-0-96-251' => 2
                      };
              20150606
              sendfail
              $VAR1 = {
                        '0-0-1-4' => 1267,
                        '0-0-1-7' => 1206,
                        '0-0-117-251' => 1,
                        '0-0-225-251' => 291,
                        '0-0-30-30' => 51,
                        '0-0-39-20' => 245,
                        '0-0-40-20' => 53,
                        '0-0-41-20' => 133,
                        '0-0-64-251' => 23,
                        '0-0-66-251' => 1,
                        '0-0-96-251' => 2,
                        '0-0-97-251' => 2
                      };
              20150607
              sendfail
              $VAR1 = {
                        '0-0-251-7' => 1,
                        '0-0-4-4' => 20,
                        '0-0-7-7' => 477
                      };
              
              

              0, 4, 7, 8, 20, 21, 30, 251 are valid node id's around here during this time period.
              Either it was eeprom/arduino replacement that fixed this, or just that it got rebooted (as well as replaced).. If it shows up again, I'll just try rebooting the gw and see what happens.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • S Offline
                S Offline
                Stric
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Still no crap results, probably eeprom gone bad. Shouldn't have gone bad this fast, unless something is rewriting the eeprom all the time..?

                BulldogLowellB 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S Stric

                  Still no crap results, probably eeprom gone bad. Shouldn't have gone bad this fast, unless something is rewriting the eeprom all the time..?

                  BulldogLowellB Offline
                  BulldogLowellB Offline
                  BulldogLowell
                  Contest Winner
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  @Stric

                  why not test the EEPROM, writing and reading to every location and find out for sure?

                  It's unlikely that the registry for nodes exceeded your EEPROM life, unless you altered gateway code... else so goes the rest of us, I'm guessing.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Offline
                    S Offline
                    Stric
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Yup. I could do that.. memtest86+, arduino edition..

                    BulldogLowellB 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • S Stric

                      Yup. I could do that.. memtest86+, arduino edition..

                      BulldogLowellB Offline
                      BulldogLowellB Offline
                      BulldogLowell
                      Contest Winner
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      @Stric said:

                      Yup. I could do that.. memtest86+, arduino edition..

                      yeah, remove all doubt.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      14

                      Online

                      11.7k

                      Users

                      11.2k

                      Topics

                      113.1k

                      Posts


                      Copyright 2025 TBD   |   Forum Guidelines   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms of Service
                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • MySensors
                      • OpenHardware.io
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular