Extend Z-Wave & Insteon over IP Network

[BelWave]

Hello,

What is the best method of extending your ISY944i control to areas beyond powerline and RF reach?  Can you use two Z-Net boxes "back to back" over an IP network to extend the Z-Wave network?

Is there a way to control a second ISY944i as a "slave" unit over an IP network from your primary ISY944i?

Searching Google comes up with lots of information of similar questions, but no real solutions.  

Thanks!

 

Brad

[paulbates]

Hi Brad

How far are you trying to reach?

Is there a way to control a second ISY944i as a "slave" unit over an IP network from your primary ISY944i?

Yes, but maybe not what you're expecting and requires some work. You can use the ISY's API to send rest calls between the units... but each interaction (light on, light off, run program .etc) must be set up individually as network resources and sent one at a time from ISY programs. You'll need to buy the ISY's network module or portal subscription to do this, if you don't have either of those already. Also, the Network module can not receive the response from making a rest command to the other ISY. So you have to trust that the command made it, or add additional complexity to verify each command. That's a long way of saying I would define the Insteon/z-wave devices native to each ISY in its location, and communicate by setting variables remotely from the other ISY, running programs remotely.. or send device commands remotely

Communication between 2 ISYs is a mentioned future feature of the ISY's V5 firmware, but since its in beta and finishing up on current functionality, it could be a while before that feature arrives.

Paul

[BelWave]

Hello Paul,

Thanks for the quick response.

In this case I'm trying to reach my Z-Wave door locks at two locations well beyond Z-Wave RF reach. Boat dock storage closet is the first lock and a detached metal garage building is the second lock.

I think I'm looking for a device similar to the Homesear Z Net:

https://shop.homeseer.com/products/z-wave-network-controller?_pos=1&_sid=84d576612&_ss=r

Seems like a pretty simple idea...take in the Z-Wave information on one end, transport it via TCP-IP and regurgitate it out the other end.

Will this not work?  If the Z Net device won't work this way why couldn't a couple ISY944i's be configured to do this?  

Brad

[paulbates]

Hi Brad

Yes, the Z Net concept makes a lot of sense. I don't see a reason why the Z Net wouldn't work, but I currently don't have z-wave devices. I know there are a number of ISY/HS users here that may be able to provide comments. From your requirements, that device seems a lot simpler than a second ISY and additional complexity.

Paul

[mwester]

9 minutes ago, BelWave said:

...Seems like a pretty simple idea...take in the Z-Wave information on one end, transport it via TCP-IP and regurgitate it out the other end.

Will this not work?  If the Z Net device won't work this way why couldn't a couple ISY944i's be configured to do this?  ...

Actually, the device does NOT take z-wave on one end, transport it via TCP-IP, and regurgitate it out the other end -- it's a great deal more complicated than that.  In a nutshell, it replaces your existing z-wave controller that you are using with HomeSeer's software, and using a great deal of magic, it makes multiple of these things appear as if they are on a single z-wave network to the HomeSeer software.  In other words, it doesn't work with anything but HomeSeer's software, and that means it won't work with the ISY either.

As for your second question, hardware-wise the ISY can certainly be set up to conceptually support such a thing (if they have the memory and CPU is quite another issue).  However, the software inside the ISY needs to be designed to handle such a thing -- it would need to be aware of which node is managed by which ISY, so that it can forward messages appropriately.  Cross-device scenes become a bit more interesting.  The UI would also need to be aware of this, so that it could present the use with some information noting which insteon and z-wave devices are in which ISY's control (so that I would be aware as I linked a scene if the scene would be "pure native" or would require the ISYs to repeat the signal to create the scene).  I'm guessing - I expect UDI has a much better grasp on what's all involved in this since I suspect they've looked at the feasibility of such a solution at some point or other,  based on user requests.

So, to provide some useful help: the solution you need, assuming you want to use the ISY, is to use a second ISY at the remote location with a z-wave board (and at least one or two other z-wave always-on repeat-capable devices to form a mesh).  You'll need to have some creative programming set up using state variables and network resources to have programs on each ISY communicate with each other.  Quite do-able, but not a magic drop-in solution.

[simplextech]

36 minutes ago, mwester said:

Actually, the device does NOT take z-wave on one end, transport it via TCP-IP, and regurgitate it out the other end -- it's a great deal more complicated than that.  In a nutshell, it replaces your existing z-wave controller that you are using with HomeSeer's software, and using a great deal of magic, it makes multiple of these things appear as if they are on a single z-wave network to the HomeSeer software.  In other words, it doesn't work with anything but HomeSeer's software, and that means it won't work with the ISY either.

You are correct that it will not work with the ISY.  However it's not that magical or complex.  It's a raspberry PI with a z-wave controller (rPi HAT). It runs software (ser2net) which is open source and it exposes the z-wave controller (can be a usb stick BTW) back to the HS server as a serial adapter (COM Port).  

From the Z-Wave stand point HS doesn't do any magic but has full support for Z-Wave protocol and controller support which by spec includes the support for multiple controller support in a full "secondary inclusion" and secondary controller or stand alone controller.  Using the secondary inclusion controller function is what makes things work on the "same z-wave network".  This is however more hassle and less useful than you may hope it to be and it provides no redundancy it just keeps a single z-wave network ID across the two controllers which is actually not very beneficial.  

The real benefit of the z-net and options are through the HS implementation of Z-Wave controller support.  Specifically the support of multiple controllers.  Each being on their own z-wave network (with unique z-wave network ID) but HS then "Knows" about each of these networks and presents the devices to the UI and to Events through a single interface and all devices can be used.  It's just like what Polyglot does for integrating other devices/hubs/systems.  The large benefit here with having multiple controllers is range and number of devices.  Each controller supports 252 devices so you can grow your z-wave network very large.  You can also segment it off to secure/non-secure devices and you can extend the network via IP (ethernet or wifi) to get to those hard to reach areas that were not reachable before.

Nothing that HS does is magic and it's all per z-wave spec/design they are simply the ONLY system out there today that has gone and implemented the full z-wave feature capability in regards to controllers.  Now they are also lacking in other feature sets... such as a full/complete backup/restore capability to other controllers (besides their own USB stick).

On the "thinking" of Z-Net I have been thinking for a while now of a polyglot that could use another ISY as a remote z-wave controller and this effectively would be the same as a z-net for the ISY.  Each controller is independent and devices included/excluded to each of them however the devices themselves would be exposed to a master controller via Polyglot to then be used in programs.  

Lately I've been too busy with HS plugins and haven't spent nearly as much time as I want to with ISY development.

[BelWave]

Great information!

Simplex Tech,  I'd be willing to pay you for a TCP-IP extender solution utilizing the ISY platform if you are interested in developing it.  We need an "ISY-Net" solution!

Thank you,

Brad

 

[simplextech]

26 minutes ago, BelWave said:

Great information!

Simplex Tech,  I'd be willing to pay you for a TCP-IP extender solution utilizing the ISY platform if you are interested in developing it.  We need an "ISY-Net" solution!

Thank you,

Brad

 

I will say that I'm interested in developing it.  It is on my todo list of ISY projects.

[BelWave]

Sounds good and please keep me updated on this.  Again, willing to help pay for this if that moves it up the list on getting it done!

In the meantime it seems like the only option I have is to add a second independent ISY with Z-Wave module out in the garage, correct?  Then just add a second profile for the garage in my MobiLinc Pro iPhone app, correct?  Same with any other detached building beyond the Z-Wave RF range.  

Thanks,

Brad

 

[simplextech]

15 minutes ago, BelWave said:

Sounds good and please keep me updated on this.  Again, willing to help pay for this if that moves it up the list on getting it done!

In the meantime it seems like the only option I have is to add a second independent ISY with Z-Wave module out in the garage, correct?  Then just add a second profile for the garage in my MobiLinc Pro iPhone app, correct?  Same with any other detached building beyond the Z-Wave RF range.  

Thanks,

Brad

 

At the moment the second ISY being independent is the option and would be part of the "solution" I'm thinking of as well.  The ISY and Z-Wave controllers within them would still be independent of each other.  A Polyglot would glue one (maybe more) to a central ISY where the nodes would be presented.  Those nodes would then be usable in programs just like any other node.  

Now the downside, until it can either be worked out or modified is that the ISY and thus z-wave devices would still be independent and device level configuration would still be necessary from the ISY that owns the device.  I'm not sure if any of the device level z-wave commands are exposed through the API at this point or not.  However something to think about and poke @Michel Kohanim about

The other downside is that because it would be a nodeserver those nodes don't currently work with Mobilinc or Agave (to my current knowledge).  With that you would still need to setup both ISY's in the mobile apps to view the devices until Mobilinc supports Nodeservers.

 

[simplextech]

I have a prototype Polyglot Nodeserver working.

• Currently working off the same ISY so physical and mirror device are on the same ISY
• Mirrors the devices (power strips)
  • Sync of status - on/off
  • Control from nodeserver node changes the physical node
• Just the early start of this nodeserver

[simplextech]

As previously posted I have a working prototype.  I would like to soon publish for people to test with and provide feedback.  However!  I need a name.

What is this going to be called?  ISYMirror, PolyMirror, PolyisyMirror?  I had thought of z-mirror or something however this could very well be expanded to mirror any device the ISY (soon to be Polyisy) presents through the REST interface.  So.. thoughts?

Aside from a name I need to know what devices people are interested in using with this to determine IF I have those devices or if I need to beg/borrow some.  I also need to acquire another ISY994i ZW+Pro to further development so this may delay release time by a few weeks.

[paulbates]

Depeche Node?

[simplextech]

29 minutes ago, paulbates said:

Depeche Node?

Ok that one has me laughing out loud and the wife looking at me in that funny "are you ok" look...

[larryllix]

EthernISY ?

[gzahar]

EthernISY ?

Or SynchronISY


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[simplextech]

8 hours ago, larryllix said:

EthernISY ?

.... Thoughts?

EtherISY / ISYEther

ISYShadow /ISYSpectre / ISYGhost

[gviliunas]

My $0.02:   "EitherISY" sounds like a winner.

[larryllix]

3 hours ago, simplextech said:

.... Thoughts?

EtherISY / ISYEther

ISYShadow /ISYSpectre / ISYGhost

Sounds like a choice = "Either ISY" or an obsolete Anesthesiologist's gas.

ISY/LANx

[simplextech]

8 hours ago, larryllix said:

Sounds like a choice = "Either ISY" or an obsolete Anesthesiologist's gas.

ISY/LANx

hmm yeah...

Ok... more ideas for a name??? 

[BelWave]

Sounds good.  PM me your shipping address and I'll get an ISY994i ZW+Pro on its way to you.

I'm primarily interested in the Kwikset locks, but it sounds like any and all Insteon/Z-Wave devices should be "Mirrored".  Correct?

Thanks,

Brad

[simplextech]

2 hours ago, BelWave said:

Sounds good.  PM me your shipping address and I'll get an ISY994i ZW+Pro on its way to you.

I'm primarily interested in the Kwikset locks, but it sounds like any and all Insteon/Z-Wave devices should be "Mirrored".  Correct?

Thanks,

Brad

I've found an item with the device properties that I'm working through.  I don't want any money spent towards anything until I get this item worked out.  

As for locks I don't have/use any z-wave locks so I'll need either a lot of back and forth trial-error testing.  Or a lock to test/validate with on premise.  We can discuss that after I get this extended properties item resolved.

[BelWave]

I should have an old Z-Wave Kwikset lock you can test with.  It won't have the newer Z-Wave+ module in it, so less range.  It is functional and works fine if it's within range.

Brad

[BelWave]

I know and appreciate the effort SimplexTech has put forth (offlist) in trying to explain to me why we can just come up with a Z-Wave to TCP-IP converter.  Apparently it just isn't that simple!  

What about a Insteon to Z-Wave converter?  Isn't that essentially what this is for a Z-Wave smoke detector?  Could this idea/technology be expanded to regurgitate IN/OUT Z-Wave/Insteon information for more than just a Z-Wave smoke detector?

https://www.smarthome.com/insteon-2982-222-smoke-bridge.html

Ultimately not as good as extending Z-Wave/Insteon over TCP-IP, but could be a way to extend Z-Wave devices beyond the very limited RF range.   I do have good Insteon communication to switches in my detached metal garage/workshop that is well outside the Z-Wave range.   

Just a thought...

Brad

 

[lilyoyo1]

Insteon and zwave are 2 different protocols that do not talk to one another so there's no way to get the zwave signal sent via the insteon network. Insteon devices simply do not have a zwave chip inside to read the message and convert it back. 

Technically it would be possible for someone to build a piece of hardware that could do it. However, simplextech way is probably a much easier and cheaper undertaking