OH2 Z-Wave refactoring and testing... and SECURITY

[sihui]

@maydo

i have probs with mesh (>140 zwave things

Wow, huge amount of devices! I can only tell for 18 devices: it’s working …

[maydo (ridvan)]

f.e. i have a popp rain sensor, which loose always his connection and dont update any data.

the neighbour list is not up to date, when i move the rain sensor near controller and wake it up than it updates, but when move back to destination, it updates one or two times.

there are also some other (powered) devices like fibaro switches or fibaro rgb which dont update.

all devices are spread over 3 buildings diameter is about 30m. and there are enough powered devices for mesh.

i have moved from fibaro hc2 to OH2 before some (6-10) weeks ago, on hc2 all devices was working.

so i think the problem why things loose connection or dont update is mesh heal (update neighbours does not work on current master)

[chris (Chris Jackson)]

I’m quite surprised about that and the information I have from most other people and discussions I’ve seen on the list is that the new binding works fine with the mesh updates. I’m not sure what else can be done to resolve that then.

Actually, looking at your image - are you REALLY sure you are running the development version? I see the question mark next to “security” - this shouldn’t happen with the development version - only the snapshot version. So, I think you are not running the development version - please confirm exactly what version you use.

[maydo (ridvan)]

no im on latest snapshot version (master)

i have not the development version, this is the reason, why im asking when you are planning to add the development version into master

[chris (Chris Jackson)]

@maydo

no im on latest snapshot version (master)

Ok, my question above was if there was any reason not to merge this version (ie the development version) into the master, so when you said that the mesh update wasn’t working, I thought you meant it wasn’t working in the new version .

Anyway, I see you now removed this comment from your post above and now have another question. Since it is not related to this version I don’t think it’s relevant.

[Dim (Angelos)]

I would love to see the refactored Z-Wave binding into the 2.2.0 Snapshot releases !

[chris (Chris Jackson)]

Are you using the current development version? Is it working ok then?

[Dim (Angelos)]

Absolutely!

I am on it since the very begging of it.
I don’t have many devices (only 10, out of which only 1 is using security) and I have no problems at all.

[chris (Chris Jackson)]

Great - thanks

[Mike_Bagdanoff]

I’ve got 63 devices and everything seems to be working well with the 6/18 build. I guess the only real problem with wider distribution is that it will break everyone.

Having to delete and re add all zwave things is quite a task for people with >50 devices so it may be worth looking into a way to automate this as part of the install.

[chris (Chris Jackson)]

@Mike_Bagdanoff

I guess the only real problem with wider distribution is that it will break everyone.

I agree, but snapshots are where the changes happen and that’s why I wanted to do it after the release - it gives us a few months to iron things out with an wider community…

@Mike_Bagdanoff

Having to delete and re add all zwave things is quite a task for people with >50 devices so it may be worth looking into a way to automate this as part of the install.

I’m not really sure that’s possible - at least not within the binding. I’ll have a think about it though…

Thanks for the feedback.

[mhilbush (Mark)]

@chris

I’d be tempted to look at resolving the way DEAD items are handled and change it back to the original internal detection rather than using the controller as this seems unreliable.

I’d prefer to see this done before you add the new binding to the 2.2 snapshot. Other than that, I’m in.

[chris (Chris Jackson)]

@mhilbush

I’d prefer to see this done before you add the new binding to the 2.2 snapshot.

Agreed - that was my point .

[sipvoip (Nathan Stratton)]

@chris

What’s the consensus - is this version ready for a wider use? I don’t have a feeling for how many people are using it - I know there are a few issues still, but I assume most people find it’s working ok?

I’d be tempted to look at resolving the way DEAD items are handled and change it back to the original internal detection rather than using the controller as this seems unreliable. What other issues are critical that need resolving?

I have been using it for a while now with manually configured things! Only issue that I have is the DEAD items issue, I have 2 nodes that are marked DEAD by the controller but I still get updates from them.

[sipvoip (Nathan Stratton)]

@Mike_Bagdanoff

Having to delete and re add all zwave things is quite a task for people with >50 devices so it may be worth looking into a way to automate this as part of the install.

You may want to look at manually configuring your .things, I found this a much better option for large networks.

[crimsondr (Brian Chan)]

@chris

I’d be tempted to look at resolving the way DEAD items are handled and change it back to the original internal detection rather than using the controller as this seems unreliable. What other issues are critical that need resolving?

I also have several devices being marked as failed but they communicate fine and I get all status updates. They come up and down randomly according to the logs.

[shorty707]

@sipvoip

You may want to look at manually configuring your .things, I found this a much better option for large networks.

good point

I have manually added all items but use things from discovery…

So going to the refactored version is maybe a good time to switch to .thing files …

deleting all zwave things and add them in the file should be fine?

can you post a few lines of zwave things to use for the syntax?

[sipvoip (Nathan Stratton)]

Bridge zwave:serial_zstick:controller "ZWave Controller" [ port="/dev/ttyACM0", controller_softreset="false", controller_master="true", controller_inclusiontimeout=60, heal_enable="true", heal_time=2, security_networkkey="AF 2D 9E 35 21 A1 ED 2B 45 B1 F4 DA 39 A8 B5 F2"
 ]

Thing zwave:rtc_ct100_00_000:controller:node2 "Node 2: CT100 - First Floor" (zwave:serial_zstick:controller) [ node_id=2 ] {
  Channels:
    Type sensor_temperature : sensor_temperature [ config_scale=1 ]
    Type thermostat_setpoint : thermostat_setpoint_cooling [ config_scale=1 ]
    Type thermostat_setpoint : thermostat_setpoint_heating [ config_scale=1 ]
}
Thing zwave:homeseer_hswd100_00_000:controller:node22 "Node 22: HSWD100 - Outside Front Door Lights" (zwave:serial_zstick:controller) [ node_id=22 ]
Thing zwave:enerwave_zw20r_00_000:controller:node30 "Node 30: ZW20R - House Outside Outlet A" (zwave:serial_zstick:controller) [ node_id=30 ]
Thing zwave:ge_zw4002_00_000:controller:node44 "Node 44: ZW4002 - Master bedroom Fan" (zwave:serial_zstick:controller) [ node_id=44 ] 
Thing zwave:yale_yrl220_00_000:controller:node50 "Node 50: YRL220 - Front Door" (zwave:serial_zstick:controller) [ node_id=50 ]

[DanielMalmgren]

@crimsondr

I also have several devices being marked as failed but they communicate fine and I get all status updates.

That’s about the same behaviour as I see here. Handling of dead/failed nodes isn’t perfect. But then again in my experience that’s the big are of problem with z-wave in general, with all softwares I’ve used, so I can’t say this one is worse than anything else. Except for this everything is working like a charm for me, so I would say it’s ready for wider testing.

[vossivossi]

@chris

What’s the consensus - is this version ready for a wider use?

I am using it for 3 Months now, 2 parallel controllers (2 Home Ids), 100 devices, 350 items. Currently I am running the 20150625 version.
Overall impression is really good, but there are a couple of points that need to be fixed:

• Setting of Multiinstance associations for Zwave+ devices with multiple endpoints (important)
• Dead node problem (important, but aleady mentioned by many other people here)
• No unqiue reference to nodes in logs when used with mutiple controllers as only node id is shown (nice to have)

Thank a lot for your great work! The multi controller option is absolutely fantastic allowing me to operate separate networks by floor. This solved all problems of my big concrete floors and reduced timeouts to close to zero. And it even allows you to operate even more than 230 Zwave nodes in a house (in theory, my network is not that big yet)

Cheers!
Martin