Jump to content

unable to securely include GD00Z-4 garage door controller


wmcneil

Recommended Posts

Posted

When I attempt to include a Nortek GD00Z-4 garage door controller, the ISY starts the inclusion process, but fails with a "The Z-Wave network failed to securely include your new device. Please exclude the device and try including it again." message. I have tried to exclude, and then include several times, always with the same failing result. I have also factory reset the GD00Z-4, with no change in behavior. 

If I move the device out of the garage(which is in the basement), and place it very close to my ISY (located in the main level of the house), it will does appear to include correctly. There are other ac powered ZWAVE devices in the basement level, including two light switches in the garage, and three other devices in the finished area of the basement, but none of them that support AES encryption. I have an aeotec range extender 6, which does support encryption, and I have tried moving that around, but it has not helped. Given all the negative press I am now reading in these forums about the range extender, it seems I should try the aeotec siren, since that seems to be getting positive press, and does appear to support encryption. I'm posting here to see if anyone else has experience with the GD00Z  and has any other suggestions. I'm running 5.0.15a on my isy. Here are some more details from the log:

Sun 09/15/2019 01:38:08 PM : Listening for Z-Wave devices to add to the network

Sun 09/15/2019 01:38:11 PM : Adding Z-Wave devices stopped

Sun 09/15/2019 01:38:35 PM : [ZWAVE-TX-NR     ] [0105004AC1EE9F]                        REQ ZW_ADD_NODE_TO_NETWORK 

Sun 09/15/2019 01:38:35 PM : [UZW-CMD 1       ] Start Include

Sun 09/15/2019 01:38:35 PM : Listening for Z-Wave devices to add to the network

Sun 09/15/2019 01:38:51 PM : Z-Wave device detected, retrieving info 2

Sun 09/15/2019 01:38:51 PM : Z-Wave device detected, retrieving info 3

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:13 PM : Z-Wave device detected, retrieving info 5

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:13 PM : [ZWAVE-TX        ] [0105004A85EFDA]                        REQ ZW_ADD_NODE_TO_NETWORK 

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:13 PM : Adding Z-Wave devices stopped

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:14 PM : [ZWAVE-TX        ] [01030020DC]                            REQ MEMORY_GET_ID 

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:14 PM : [ZWAVE-TX        ] [01030002FE]                            REQ SERIAL_API_GET_INIT_DATA 

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:14 PM : [ZWAVE-TX        ] [01030005F9]                            REQ ZW_GET_CONTROLLER_CAPABILITIES 

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:14 PM : Exchanging data with secure Z-Wave device 46 of type 4.64.7

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:14 PM : Adding secure Z-Wave device

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:17 PM : [ZWAVE-TX    46.0] [98/04] Security Scheme Get - supported=........ ACK,AUTO To=0x2E

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:27 PM : [ZWAVE-ADDSECURE] Error 3

Sun 09/15/2019 01:39:27 PM : Failed to include secure Z-Wave device 46 of type 4.64.7
 

Posted

The encryption aspect is necessary during the inclusion process.  So if including through the network (NWI) then the devices in between must support the encryption.  However once the device is included the standard commands will repeat through non-secure devices.  Typical inclusion of this device and per the instructions it came with are to include the opener as close to the z-wave controller as possible to ensure a proper inclusion.  Then move the device (ie install it) in it's final location.

This will also be a good use case for ISY-Net.  I need to setup the new test ISY in the garage and add the door opener to it :)

 

Posted
5 hours ago, simplextech said:

The encryption aspect is necessary during the inclusion process.  So if including through the network (NWI) then the devices in between must support the encryption.  However once the device is included the standard commands will repeat through non-secure devices.  Typical inclusion of this device and per the instructions it came with are to include the opener as close to the z-wave controller as possible to ensure a proper inclusion.  Then move the device (ie install it) in it's final location.

This will also be a good use case for ISY-Net.  I need to setup the new test ISY in the garage and add the door opener to it :)

 

I moved the GD00Z close to my ISY, included it(without error), then moved it to the install location in the garage. I then did a heal/repair/synchronize all. The ISY is now having problems communicating with the GD00Z. I will try again once I have a aeotec siren to act as a repeater.

Posted
2 minutes ago, wmcneil said:

I moved the GD00Z close to my ISY, included it(without error), then moved it to the install location in the garage. I then did a heal/repair/synchronize all. The ISY is now having problems communicating with the GD00Z. I will try again once I have a aeotec siren to act as a repeater.

Any powered z-wave plus device will work as a repeater after the inclusion.  How many z-wave devices do you have?  How many are there in between the ISY and the GDO?  Oh and sometimes a "heal/repair" breaks things temporarily as the mesh is now actually trying to rebuild what it actually already knew.  A repair/heal with z-wave plus 90% of the time is not needed unless it's a very small or brand new mesh install and you're adding new devices to the very edge of your existing mesh.

Posted

I ordered a aeotec siren 5, but received a siren 6. The ISY does not appear to currently support siren 6. (See other thread here.). The siren 6 also is not helping my problems with communicating with my GD00Z, which will not communciate at all with the ISY in its required installed location.  Since there are two other zwave light switches located 15 feet from the GD00Z install location that are working perfectly fine, clearly there must be encryption traffic that the GD00Z requires for communication after it has been included....I am a long time ISY user of both insteon and zwave, and I am setting up a new house. This is frustrating. I guess I will try and get my hands on a siren 5, as well as hope siren 6 gets supported soon. 

Posted

There's no problem with the range extender in itself. It's been improved tremendously. Most people desire dual use products to get the best bang for their buck. At one time maybe but aeotec has improved that device. 

In my experience, zwave itself is very finicky compared to Insteon (both have pros and cons). Alot of people will place zwave devices where they want them at vs where they need to be thinking devices will be close enough. However, that generally leads to failure. If you're not going to invest in enough devices from the beginning; you definitely need to be strategic about placement. My general rule is to map out a path that has the least resistance. No walls, obstacles or metal. Once I've mapped out what I think I need, I add 2 more devices knowing there will probably be issues. 

Troubleshooting sucks. Prior to installation of important items such as locks (pretty much what I use zwave for) I test them to make sure they work. Once that is established, any other issues that I find I know it's most like a range issue. Having those additional devices on hand helps. The other thing is having the minimum amount of devices needed for a strong mesh network. Sure it may work. However, from time to time, you'll probably have communication issues. 

Posted
10 hours ago, lilyoyo1 said:

There's no problem with the range extender in itself. It's been improved tremendously. Most people desire dual use products to get the best bang for their buck. At one time maybe but aeotec has improved that device. 

In my experience, zwave itself is very finicky compared to Insteon (both have pros and cons). Alot of people will place zwave devices where they want them at vs where they need to be thinking devices will be close enough. However, that generally leads to failure. If you're not going to invest in enough devices from the beginning; you definitely need to be strategic about placement. My general rule is to map out a path that has the least resistance. No walls, obstacles or metal. Once I've mapped out what I think I need, I add 2 more devices knowing there will probably be issues. 

Troubleshooting sucks. Prior to installation of important items such as locks (pretty much what I use zwave for) I test them to make sure they work. Once that is established, any other issues that I find I know it's most like a range issue. Having those additional devices on hand helps. The other thing is having the minimum amount of devices needed for a strong mesh network. Sure it may work. However, from time to time, you'll probably have communication issues. 

Are you using a range extender 6 to assist with encrypted communication range (My range extender is a range extender 6)?

The issue is that I need a powered zwave repeater device that supports encryption, and is supported by the ISY. Any one will do, but I need ONE that definitely works. A lot of folks insist the range extender does not work, and it does not appear to be working for me. The siren 6 is clearly not supported by the ISY at this time,. 

Posted

All zwave plus devices support encryption. its required for any device certified after 2017.

I don't use stand alone repeaters as I prefer devices that can serve other functions. I do know quite a few people who had tried newer repeaters successfully (can't speak on the latest version) Maybe at one time, it did suck but the aeotec extender had improved over the years. Unfortunately in life, once something has a bad name it's hard to get rid of. Someone on here recently posted he successfully added the 6 to the isy.

What light switches do you have nearby? Are your boxes plastic or metal? Distance itself is not a good indicator that something "should" work. Due to the design of my house, I have more devices going to my back door (takes more hops) than my front door even though it's closer.

Posted
2 hours ago, wmcneil said:

lilyoyo, I have GE light switches. They are zwave plus, and they do not support encryption. Here is the website to find the certified features , you will find that there are many zwave plus devices that do not support encryption: https://products.z-wavealliance.org/regions/2/categories

Anything certified after April 2017 is required to have it. I can only assume the versions you purchased was certified prior to that. The good thing is that it can be upgraded if ge chooses to

Posted

I purchased some additional aeotec range extender 6 devices, and am now able to communicate reliably with my GD00Z controller. The range extender 6 devices are definitely supporting encryption, both with my GD00Z, as well as with my kwikset 914 door lock, which also requires encryption (as well as beaming). So for those who are looking for a repeater device that supports both beaming and encryption, the range extender 6 supports both, both in its certification sheet, and in my usage in my house.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

One further clarification: The aeotec range extender 6 supports encryption for Zwave S0 security suite. It does not support Zwave S2 security suite. (My Zwave lock is a Kiwkset 914 that supports only S0 security)

I see that there is an aeotec range extender 7 now shown on the zwave certification website. Sadly, while it's certification sheet shows support for S2, it does not support S0. This seems like a really bad choice. I don't find the range extender 7 yet for sale on the web, perhaps aeotec will add S0 support before sales begin?

Posted
38 minutes ago, wmcneil said:

I see that there is an aeotec range extender 7 now shown on the zwave certification website. Sadly, while it's certification sheet shows support for S2, it does not support S0.

Backwards compatibility is "inferred" with Z-Wave devices which is why it won't be specifically listed.

Posted

There should be a single format in the compliance sheet. Some devices list both S0 and S2 as a "yes" (they always appear on separate rows on the compliance sheet), so the fact that S2 is shown as "yes" and "S0" as a "no" is inconsistent at a minimum. 

Posted

There's always inconsistencies with data bases.  Unfortunately we have no control over that. Its more as a guide than the final word. With that said, as simplextech alluded to, zwave is backwards compatible so it's built in. The main thing with locks is having beaming capabilities. Many controllers don't support S2 so most likely it would be downgraded anyway

Posted
7 hours ago, wmcneil said:

There should be a single format in the compliance sheet. Some devices list both S0 and S2 as a "yes" (they always appear on separate rows on the compliance sheet), so the fact that S2 is shown as "yes" and "S0" as a "no" is inconsistent at a minimum. 

There are a lot of inconsistencies with Z-Wave devices and their listings and different vendors using their own "labels" like Gen5, Gen6, Gen7 that people always confuse to have something to do with the Z-Wave chip used which it doesn't.

If a device says it has S2 security it will fall back to S0 when the controller doesn't support S2.  That is how Z-Wave works.  

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...