Twinkly Integration - erroneous Already_configured error

[tre4b]

The problem

I have two strings of lights. Both are Series 1, both have firmware of 2.3.5. One is on 10.0.10.183 and the other on 10.0.10.184.

When I add 183 it adds normally and everything works.
When I try and add 184 I get an already_configured message, despite this string not yet being configured.
If I remove 183 and then add 184 it adds, however I then get the already_configured error when attempting to add 183

I have quite few twinkly lights 3 icicle, 1 600 led, 1 flex all series 2 and all added perfectly.

I suspect that fewer people have series one lights so this may not have been visible. I have them and am capable of carrying out any debugging steps that may help.

What version of Home Assistant Core has the issue?

core 2024.12.4

What was the last working version of Home Assistant Core?

No response

What type of installation are you running?

Home Assistant OS

Integration causing the issue

twinkly

Link to integration documentation on our website

No response

Diagnostics information

home-assistant_twinkly_2024-12-19T17-35-07.368Z.log

config_entry-twinkly-01JFB8EF9CFDZQ15V982ZV535H - tree1-183.json

config_entry-twinkly-01JFG064PQ4PARQC20PE5BY7TY-tree2-184.json

Note: I removed Tree1 then added Tree2 with its address to get the second tree file so you can compare . Following link may help with that. Apart from the fact that there are some spec differences I could not see anything that might clash.

https://www.textcompare.org/yaml/?id=67645be3dd54018d5d4e2ae9

Example YAML snippet

Nothing Yaml for this.

Anything in the logs that might be useful for us?

No response

Additional information

At one point I did have a look at the source code from github. I found a line that suggested that already_configured was the response when a try catch block failed. It may be that the error is something other than it being already configured, something that series 1 lights cause when whatever was in the try block was executed.

[home-assistant]

Hey there @dr1rrb, @RobBie1221, @Olen, mind taking a look at this issue as it has been labeled with an integration (twinkly) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!

Code owner commands

Code owners of twinkly can trigger bot actions by commenting:

• @home-assistant close Closes the issue.
• @home-assistant rename Awesome new title Renames the issue.
• @home-assistant reopen Reopen the issue.
• @home-assistant unassign twinkly Removes the current integration label and assignees on the issue, add the integration domain after the command.
• @home-assistant add-label needs-more-information Add a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component) to the issue.
• @home-assistant remove-label needs-more-information Remove a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component) on the issue.

_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

---

twinkly documentation
twinkly source
_{^{(message by IssueLinks)}}

[joostlek]

@Olen any reason why we pick the UUID over the mac?

[Olen]

No special reason from my part. I guess the uuid seemed quite unique, and was easily available in the library. (Honestly, i have not looked at the code for a long time)

[joostlek]

Let me also cc @jschlyter