I have a Schlage FE599 installed and working on my Vera3 network.
I would like to set PIN codes which are only valid for a date-specific range. Anybody know if that is possible and how? (I couldn’t find anything by searching?)
Any help appreciated!
thanks,
Jim
7-13-14 Update:
I found the Vera DoorLock1 UPnp device info. It shows under the variable “PINcodes” the following syntax:
<VERSION=3>next_available_user_code_id\t
user_code_id,active,date_added,date_used,PIN_code(encrypted),name(a-z,0-9);
slot,slot_lock,w,[d|s],dow,hour_start,minute_start,hour_stop,minute_stop;
slot,slot_lock,t,[d|s],start,stop;\t
However, when I look at the log for LuaUPnP (where it will report the doorLock variables), I only see the following data showing up from my lock:
? " 4,1,2014-06-27 21:08:19,2014-07-02 20:42:48,9999,Jim; " ?
Which I read as:
“4” is the user_code_id.
“1” is supposed to be the “active” field where:
“1 = The code is permanently programmed into the lock, which doesn’t support hardware-based scheduling.”
However, I don’t think the first part of this statement is true. This user_code (“4”) was programmed into the lock over my Vera network- and therefore shouldn’t be reported as “permanently programmed”, should it? And if the first part of the statement is not true, can I believe the second part about not supporting hardware-based scheduling? BTW, the other options for the “active” field include:
3 = The code is programmed into the lock and will be removed by software later.
4 = The code is not programmed into the lock, but it will be programmed later by the software.
5 = The code is programmed into the lock which supports hardware-based scheduling and will enable/disable it automatically.
continuing…
“2014-06-27 21:08:19” is the date_added.
"2014-07-02 20:42:48"is the date_used.
“9999” is the PIN_code.
“Jim” is the name.
And since there is no more information after the “name” field (i.e. no dates), does that mean that there are no “start” and “end” date-fields in this lock? Or does it just mean that they haven’t been entered? Looking at the other PINcode data in the log is ambiguous. On the one hand, the hard-coded PIN’s that come from the factory show “empty” fields separated by commas where the date_added and date_used fields should be (i.e. “1,1,****,Code 1;”), implying that missing data is “shown” as missing. But on the other hand, the unused PINcodes don’t display anything more than: “5,0;” which I take to mean <user_code=5, active=0-i.e. not programmed>, and the unprogrammed fields are not even displayed as “empty” comma delimited fields.
Anybody have any insight into what this means?
Thanks.