Milight: white led bulb does not work with V6 bridge


I have Milight white led bulb and ibox2 bridge. They work fine together via milight android app.
But they do not work with openhab2 milight addon. Bridge is being discovered as V6 bridge, so I cannot bind my bulb (which is " Cold/warm white bulb (first edition)" to the V6 bridge? it asks for V3 bridge.
As I can see in the code (
there is a straightforward limitation

  <thing-type id="whiteLed">
  	<bridge-type-ref id="bridgeV3" />

So. The question is - what will be the best way to fix this? Can the author of this binding help?

Unfortunately adding V6 bridge support does not solve the problem. What I did:

  • took latest 2.5.0 snapshot of the milight addon
  • changed V3.xml to
<thing-type id="whiteLed">
<bridge-type-ref id="bridgeV3" />
<bridge-type-ref id="bridgeV6" />
  • manually installed addon to openhab2

Now I have whiteLed (possibly) working with the v6 bridge. At least in the log I can see that commands are sent to the bridge

09:44:28.782 [DEBUG] [internal.handler.AbstractLedV3Handler] - milight: dim from ‘14’ with command ‘42’ via ‘3’ steps.
09:44:28.786 [DEBUG] [.milight.internal.protocol.QueuedSend] - Sent packet '35 00 55 ’ to bridge
09:44:28.892 [DEBUG] [.milight.internal.protocol.QueuedSend] - Sent packet '3C 00 55 ’ to bridge
09:44:28.998 [DEBUG] [.milight.internal.protocol.QueuedSend] - Sent packet '35 00 55 ’ to bridge
09:44:29.102 [DEBUG] [.milight.internal.protocol.QueuedSend] - Sent packet '3C 00 55 ’ to bridge
09:44:29.211 [DEBUG] [.milight.internal.protocol.QueuedSend] - Sent packet '35 00 55 ’ to bridge
09:44:29.323 [DEBUG] [.milight.internal.protocol.QueuedSend] - Sent packet '3C 00 55 ’ to bridge

But unfortunately this does not lead to any activity between the ibox2 and the lamp itself (I am sniffing the radio with rflink). At the same time, android app still works fine and rf link happily sniffs packets like


I would like to avoid installing full-blown openhab development environment, maybe someone can point me to some minimal changes to the code to solve the problem?