Serving a "remote" building

Ya know the thing that would REALLY be great would be if somebody would be able to figure out how to build a WIFI to Z-wave (or Insteon would be cool too)repeater... with a pair (or greater number) of those, you could cover a whole lot of area in large houses, outbuildings, playgrounds...

I have searched high, and low, for such a beast. However, when you really think about it, this is actually quite complex. First off, virtually all the open (I.e. not embedded in a product) Z-Wave hardware you can buy are controllers, typically USB. But, you really don't want a controller, just the radio part of a simple switch or extender. Next, and I think this is the hard part, is the two ends of this circuit must function as one device. That is whatever is heard on side A or B must also be repeated on sides A and B.

So, you'd need two Z-wave radios and a Z-Wave software stack and then some software to link the two together, probably over UDP. I am sure it's possible, but probably not very economical and costly to develop. Also, competition from Vera, SmartThings and other systems that can link controllers reduces the demand.

Perhaps, someday Indigo will support an IP connected Z-Wave controller, like the HomeSeer Z-NET Remote Z-Wave Interface, and multiple controllers.

[jay (support)]

Perhaps, someday Indigo will support an IP connected Z-Wave controller, like the HomeSeer Z-NET Remote Z-Wave Interface, and multiple controllers.

I don't know if anyone has tried it, but it *might* work. They (HomeSeer) claim it uses the standard serial protocol which is what we use. So, using one of the two network serial port options might work. We've just not tried it and don't have the time to QA it to make it "officially" supported.

Multiple Z-Wave network support isn't going to happen any time soon - demand doesn't justify the amount of work it would take.

Ya know the thing that would REALLY be great would be if somebody would be able to figure out how to build a WIFI to Z-wave (or Insteon would be cool too)repeater... with a pair (or greater number) of those, you could cover a whole lot of area in large houses, outbuildings, playgrounds...

But, you really don't want a controller, just the radio part of a simple switch or extender. Next, and I think this is the hard part, is the two ends of this circuit must function as one device. That is whatever is heard on side A or B must also be repeated on sides A and B.

So, you'd need two Z-wave radios and a Z-Wave software stack and then some software to link the two together, probably over UDP. I am sure it's possible, but probably not very economical and costly to develop. Also, competition from Vera, SmartThings and other systems that can link controllers reduces the demand.
.

Perhaps I was being too simplistic because I don't understand all the nuts and bolts "under the hood", but I saw it as something as simple (hardware wise) as a pair of Z-wave range extenders tied to a pair of rPi or the like... a simple range extender must receive and hold a packet of Z-wave data into some kind of buffer long enough to decode the header and determine whether or not it is part of the controller network with which it is synced (to prevent relaying your neighbor's packets) and that the hop count has not been exceeded (to prevent the packet from being relayed forever). Then IF the packet belongs to the controller network it's associated with and the hop count is less than 6, it increments the hop count and re transmits the updated data packet. At the point where that packet is in buffer, it would seem to be a fairly easy task to have the Pi grab it (or design a relay which uses the pi to do the decoding/updating rather than doing it in dedicated hardware as I assume most relays do) and then have the Pi ALSO send it over IP (FTP, UDP, HTTP, shared ICloud store; they've got LOTS of alternative communication channels available) where the second Pi could then stuff the buffer of the second relay with the same updated packet, which would have no way of knowing or caring that the data didn't come from it's own receiver... As I said, not having all the detail knowledge about packet structure and buffering in the relays, which may explain why a pair of such devices couldn't be put together for the cost of a pair of Z-wave relays and Pi0-Ws.

I'm surprised this has seen no obvious traction. A large percentage of people who are doing home automation have large homes and properties, which is the whole purpose behind having computers run the environment. There is a demographic overlay that should be somewhat obvious...

I'm willing to pay good $ for a solution, but there is no solution. The Vera method is weak, at best - I want motion detectors, power monitoring, flood alarms - all of the standard Z-wave stuff that I have in my home, I want in my shop and garages. Z-wave is pitifully short distance, but I have ethernet everywhere. My Indigo controller has ethernet. Seems like a solution is pretty close, no?

There exists a device which seems to fit the bill - the HomeSeer remote. But there is no bridge between Indigo and that device. If they're "almost" there with a serial network capability, it seems EVEN CLOSER but Indigo can't support more than one Z-wave device, so even if it did work on the network port, it will fail because then I'd only be able to control one Z-wave controller, right?

JT

[jay (support)]

I'm surprised this has seen no obvious traction.

Demand has been quite low.

A large percentage of people who are doing home automation have large homes and properties

If that were true, we'd be getting a very different kind of feedback. Sure, we have users with large homes (which seem to be fine), but we have even more with average sized homes.

There is a demographic overlay that should be somewhat obvious...

Only if your assumption is true. Believe me, if we were getting enough demand to justify the cost, we would do it.

Perhaps, someday Indigo will support an IP connected Z-Wave controller, like the HomeSeer Z-NET Remote Z-Wave Interface...

I don't know if anyone has tried it, but it *might* work. They (HomeSeer) claim it uses the standard serial protocol which is what we use. So, using one of the two network serial port options might work. We've just not tried it and don't have the time to QA it to make it "officially" supported....

So, a year and a half later, has anyone tried the HomeSeer Z-Net controller?

And, Jay, when you mentioned " one of the two network serial port options" what exactly were you referring to? Using something like netcat to have the ethernet connection appear in /dev?

He meant one of the attached. I've been wondering if it works with Indigo as well. Not really willing to spend $150 to find out. ....

Well, I do have to admit that when I first started this thread in 2017 I never really looked carefully at the Z-Net device since I was really looking for a second interface or bridge for a remote location - which I "solved" with a Vera and the Vera plugin. However, now that I am looking to address a different problem, poor RF propagation location for my Indigo server, the HomeSeer Z-Net seems more attractive, so I took a closer look. Lo and behold, it is obvious from HomeSeer's product photo

Z-Net

Z-Net.png (64.67 KiB) Viewed 3044 times

that the Z-Net is built on a Raspberry-Pi, with some Z-Wave transmitter connected inside the case... possibly with the antenna glued to the cover.

There are several descriptions of R-Pi Z-Wave controller projects. So, building one should not be too difficult. You'd just need to provide the right interface. OTOH, the cost of the R-Pi + Z-Wave adapter is likely to be in the $70 to $100 range (depending on the Z-Wave interface you choose) and a couple of hours time getting it all installed. That starts getting close to the Z-Net in price.

However, There may be another option. A simple low-cost router, like the GL-MT300N-V2 Mango Mini Smart Router (or an R-Pi, etc.) + USB sharing software like VirtualHere. In this case, the Z-Wave controller would appear to be local to the Indigo server and no serial over ethernet would be required. Only downside is a number of Linux implementations have problems with the SILABS driver. So, the Z-Stick Series 2 is probably not a good idea. I have already ordered a Z-Stick Gen5 (upgrade from my series 2) and the GL-MT300N-V2 router so hopefully I can soon report on the viability of this approach.

[size=75]

However, There may be another option. A simple low-cost router, like the GL-MT300N-V2 Mango Mini Smart Router (or an R-Pi, etc.) + USB sharing software like VirtualHere. In this case, the Z-Wave controller would appear to be local to the Indigo server and no serial over ethernet would be required. Only downside is a number of Linux implementations have problems with the SILABS driver. So, the Z-Stick Series 2 is probably not a good idea. I have already ordered a Z-Stick Gen5 (upgrade from my series 2) and the GL-MT300N-V2 router so hopefully I can soon report on the viability of this approach.

I, too suffer from the remote building problem. I've also worked around it (for one site) with a Vera; and another with an IP-based I/O device [ie not zwave]. I now also suffer from the 'Indigo server in inappropriate location for zwave' problem, so I'm super interested to hear whether the reflashed Mango solution works!

But as a side-note, I see the Mango (I assume only in its native firmware mode) supports several general purpose I/Os. For some remote sites (say a garage door and a couple of movement señsors that's potentially all you need). At US$20 its way cheaper than eg Global Cache devices (and a bit cheaper but more functional than the generic relay boards that are around)...I wonder if anyone has looked at Indigo integration for that functionality...?

I, too suffer from the remote building problem. ...

Don't hold your breath. Unfortunately, nothing being discussed here would add the ability to have multiple controllers -- just flexibility in locating a controller. <SPECULATION>Though, I have long considered building a plugin to link two separate Indigo instances. In principle that should work at least as well as the Vera plugin. Of course you'd need two Indigo licenses, butMatt might be willing to look into a license bundle.</SPECULATION>

....I wonder if anyone has looked at Indigo integration for [the Mango] functionality...?

When my Mango arrives, and I've had a chance to poke around a bit I'll report back on how easy (or hard) it might be to get tighter integration.

In the meantime... my Z-Stick Gen5 arrived and I have switched everything over to it. Performance, even in the new server location is significantly better. OTOH, I tried sharing the Z-Stick using VirtualHere (Mac to Mac) and it didn't work. I did not pursue the testing since the Mango will be here soon and that is what I really want to have working.

Linking two instances seems like the best of the worst solutions. If there is a way to get a discount on the licenses, I might be interested. However, coming from the world of larger data systems, I can say with some assurance that sync'ing configurations, actions, and states is not a trivial matter. But I'd pay for that ability if someone were willing to do the work.

On the Mango: not to be a Debbie Downer, but if it doesn't work Mac-to-Mac I would be very surprised to see it work Mac-to-Mango. However, testing it is the only way to know - let us hear how it performs!

JT

...On the Mango: not to be a Debbie Downer, but if it doesn't work Mac-to-Mac I would be very surprised to see it work Mac-to-Mango. ...

It probably won't work on the Mango. But, the Mango is the preferred platform for VirtualHere's new CloudHub. So, I am hoping they will want to resolve any problems.

...On the Mango: not to be a Debbie Downer, but if it doesn't work Mac-to-Mac I would be very surprised to see it work Mac-to-Mango. ...

It probably won't work on the Mango. But, the Mango is the preferred platform for VirtualHere's new CloudHub. So, I am hoping they will want to resolve any problems.

As predicted, the Z-Stick Gen5 did not work on the Mango CloudHub. However, quite oddly, the more difficult Z-Stick 2 did work! But, it only worked on my macmini Indigo Indigo server, and not on my development iMac... both on MacOS 10.14.3

I posted on the VirtualHere support forum and received this reply

Yes its a pain, some devices wont work via virtualhere. They were all working nicely up to osx 10.10 , in 10.11 apple entirely removed support for USB Host drivers from 3rd parties. Since there have been a lot of complaints from different companies apple has gradually put support back into osx again for 3rd party drivers. It gets better as time goes on. 10.12 when they first put some support for usb drivers back in they were pretty buggy. Now most devices work again via virtualhere. There is no release notes from apple that say this because its confidential

I also tested the VirtualHere client on windows-7 and it worked there. But, for some reason, while the Z-Stick Gen5 works on my macmini and iMac when plugged in directly and through an older usb2 hub, on the iMac it will not work when plugged into a USB3 hub.

I will continue to pursue this.

...I will continue to pursue this.

EUREKA! Success, though not the way I had first hoped.

Using VirtualHere server or CloudHub is just not going to work. Too bad, it is a nice product and well supported. But, MacOS USB driver issues keep it from working to serve a remote Z-Stick.

But, not to be dissuaded from getting something working to remote my Z-Stick, I tried a different tactic. I re-flashed the GL.iNET GL-MT300N-V2 Mango Mini Travel Router back to its original state* as an OpenWRT router. Next, I plugged in the Z-Stick Gen5 and it immediately appeared as /dev/ttyACM0. I then installed** ser2net edited its config file*** and started ser2net. I then went to my Indigo server and on the Z-Wave config selected the Network Socket interface and added the url for the Mango. Badaboom, it came right up and is working.

I can now place my Z-Stick virtually anywhere I have power at a cost of USD 20/EUR 27 + the Z-Stick.. BTW, This trick would probably work with any router running OpenWRT, and certainly a Raspberry-Pi and probably dowry as well. In my installation, I located the Z-Stick server next to a Wi-Fi hub. The Mango router is powered from a USB port on the Wi-Fi hub, the the Mango's network connection is plugged directly into the Wi-Fi router. No need for an extra power supply or a new CAT5 run.

In the process of getting this working there was one glitch, getting the Mango to listen on its WAN port and be able to route out to the Internet (needed to download ser2net). I ended up just using the LAN port and adding a default route and resolver entry. Of course, if you want ton use Wi-Fi, this will not be an issue. I'll dig into that issue later.

* This step will not be necessary if you buy a new router. In my case I had flashed mine with the VirtualHere CloudHub firmware and needed to put it back to factory state.

** To install ser2net on OpenWRT:

Code: Select all

opkg update
opkg install ser2net

*** /etc/ser2net.conf should have only one entry (other than comments):

Code: Select all

15333:raw:0:/dev/ttyACM0:115200

That makes the Z-Stick available on port 15333. Feel free to change that to any free port > 1024. With that entry the Indigo url will be socket://<IP_ADDRESS>:15333

Wow. If this turns out to be a stable implementation, you may have solved a real need for many Indigo users (seems like something that will understandably not be officially supported, but still).

Nice job and great gesture sharing your results with the group.

I should probably try my SIlex USB server again under Mojave. I know they had issues with Sierra since Apple made changes to the USB stack and didn't allow third-party USB controllers. High Sierra they supported and they support Mojave as well. More expensive than the Berkinet route though.

The issues I found were not with the USB server or client, they were with the MacOS built-in drivers. I wouldn't be surprised if your Silex box works in general, but not with the Z-Stick. YMMV

Of course one big advantage of using that Homeseer box is you might be able to perform OTA updates to devices directly from it all while Indigo can still communicate with the Homeseer to control the Z-wave devices. No more unplugging the Z-Wave controller and plugging it into a Windows machine to update firmware.

I'm not sure how often firmware updates are issued. But, taking the Z-Stick to another device to update it is really not that much of a pain. I have found the VirtualBox VM/Win-7 to work quite well with the Z-Sticks. That's how I did my backup.

Maybe I should start researching the Homeseer return policy. If it doesn't work, it goes back. Or if Matt and Jay need to get some info from it to see if they can add support in the future then it might be worth the investment to keep.

I found a post on the HomeSeer forums about the compatibility of the Z-NET with Indigo... Oh wait, that post was from you BTW, If you look closely at the Z-NET devices for regions other than the US they all have an external Z-Wave controller stuck in a USB slot. Not clear what they have inside the US version. Probably a Z-Wave.me RaZberry.

BTW, based on my experience, and that post on the HomeSeer forum, I would be pretty sure the Z-NET device will work right out of the box.