I'm getting messages with service set to 5. Expected or an error on my part?

Developing with LIFX
#1

I’m taking the first steps in my program that’s using the LAN Protocol. When I send the GetService command, I get two replies from each bulb. One with service set to 1 which the docs say is UDP and one with service set to 5 which is undocumented.

2015-07-31 13:27:01.747 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.106:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.747 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 1, port: 56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.747 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.105:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.747 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 1, port: 56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.747 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.103:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.747 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 1, port: 56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.748 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.107:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.748 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 1, port: 56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.752 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.106:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.753 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 5, port: 56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.753 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.103:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.753 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 5, port: 56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.754 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.105:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.754 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 5, port: 56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.764 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593] Received Device::StateService from 192.168.1.107:56700
2015-07-31 13:27:01.764 LIFXFunHouse[46095:2904593]   service: 5, port: 56700

Am I doing something wrong or is 5 a private service which I should be ignoring?

#2

I have exactly that same issue. I’ve been ignoring it.

#3

The service number 5 is reserved, it seems to be missed on the documentation. I’ll go update them Monday when I get to work.

Your application should ignore this service message, until such point as we document what it does and how to use it.

#4

Maybe just put “All other values reserved and/or undocumented.”

#5

Turns out this was already fixed in the Github documentation and I forgot to pull the change into the other docs. I’ve done this now, simply by stating ‘All values other than those documented above are reserved for future protocol expansion.’ and then only documenting the UDP message.

Thanks for your suggestion.