7 ms·

My biggest issue with Thread is (AFAICT) it gives each device access to the internet. That's the absolute last thing I want and the reason I went 100% Z-wave (w

My biggest issue with Thread is (AFAICT) it gives each device access to the internet. That's the absolute last thing I want and the reason I went 100% Z-wave (with a handful of legacy zigbee devices). I want a single point of local hardware that my devices talk to and that hub can talk to the internet as needed but I don't want to have to vet every device or deal with companies going out of business. As it stands now I don't care at all who made my Z-wave switches/bulbs/plugs, they could already be out of business for all I care, that's not the case with 90% of "smart home" shit I see online. "No hub" means "absolutely not" for me because that's a wifi device with full access to your network (unless you segment) and the internet.

stavros 4y ago
Does it? This is a pretty big departure from Zigbee, why would they do this? It's very much an antifeature.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  Please someone tell me if I'm wrong but from reading the wiki [0] everything in there screams "this has full access to the internet". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_(network_protocol) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_(network_protocol)
  - stavros 4y ago
    Hm, yeah, it does say "cloud access". I hope they mean just the hub has access, and the devices don't rely on it.
  - jcrawfordor 4y ago
    Thread devices cannot access the internet without the cooperation of a gateway device. The topology is ultimately the same as Z-Wave with the devices communicating with a hub and the hub communicating with the internet. Thread is based on IEEE 802.15.4 just like Zigbee, but it uses IPv6 with extensions as the network protocol, for both a more powerful and flexible network protocol and more implementation commonality with existing network stacks. That said, an explicit goal of Thread is to make the implementation of the gateway device easier and thus allow devices to communicate with a backing cloud service with less active participation of the hub... the hub is still "in the loop," but it doesn't need application-specific implementation for every device, it can just forward messages.
    - wlesieutre 4y ago
      I haven't tested, but I'd hope HomePods acting as gateways would be able to toggle internet access. Apple made a whole thing about HomeKit wifi routers (there's like 1 on the market) where you can easily firewall any wifi homekit devices to within your network. Enthusiast solution would be to use Home Assistant as your thread gateway to actually be in control of the connections: https://community.home-assistant.io/t/home-assistant-skyconnect-usb-stick-announced-will-be-compatible-with-both-zigbee-and-thread-including-matter-chip-over-thread/433594 https://community.home-assistant.io/t/home-assistant-skyconn...
      - wlesieutre 4y ago
        For reference, the only HomeKit router listed on Apple's website is the "Linksys Velop AX4200 Mesh WiFi 6 System, Tri-Band" https://www.apple.com/home-app/accessories/#section-routers https://www.apple.com/home-app/accessories/#section-routers
        spdustin 4y ago
        The last few Eero mesh routers have also supported HomeKit. That’s what I use.
  - azdle 4y ago
    From the Matter Spec: > 2.3. Network Topology > [...] > This protocol may operate in the absence of globally routable IPv6 infrastructure. This requirement enables operation in a network disconnected or firewalled from the global Internet.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      Key word there is MAY, not shall... May implies it is up to the manufacture is internet (i.e globally routable IPv6 infrastructure) if required or not.
      - duckmysick 4y ago
        In the next sentence it says "requirement". Confusingly, in legal terms "may" can also indicate a mandatory provision, depending on the context. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/may https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/may
gerdesj 4y ago
"it gives each device access to the internet". I'm sure it's for your own good! I imagine the Matter SIG/Alliance is a who's who of data muncher and fetishists. Let's wait and see what this thing really looks like.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
clairity 4y ago
no, thread is a rebranding (and evolution) of the zigbee protocol, which is a low-power, local mesh network with no inherent internet connectivity. zigbee/thread devices work offline first, with switches that are an integral part of the local mesh network. these devices can also be connected to the internet through a hub/border router, if you so choose. matter is the umbrella brand name for the combo of BLE, wifi, and thread that provides a complete IoT ecosystem. i have a bunch of zigbee devices (mostly ikea tradfri) that i'm eager to upgrade in the hopes that i get more reliability and speed out of my connected devices (mostly lighting).
- bombcar 4y ago
  Why the HELL do companies and whatnot keep rebranding from something INSANELY EASY to search like Zigbee to something ENTIRELY GENERIC like thread? explodes
  - balloob 4y ago
    Because they didn't. The only thing that Thread shares with Zigbee is the radio. It's a completely different standard.
    - lancepioch 4y ago
      Zigbee Alliance renamed themselves to the CSA. Can companies still keep making Zigbee devices after Matter? Sure, it's not impossible, but it's not really going to happen much more than somebody producing anything else obsolete. The fact of the matter is that Zigbee isn't competing with Matter, it's being replaced with Matter. Rebranding may not be the best choice of words, but I think you're missing the point.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        Confederate States of America? Ballsy move.
  - piceas 4y ago
    I suspect it is desirable as one is supposed to search for the marketed products. The magic smoke that binds the device to the app or blinky lights is of little importance.
ars 4y ago
My understanding is it gives them an IPv6 address, but that does not mean they have internet access unless there is a hub that connects between the two. There's no WiFi, they use Zigbee behind the scenes, what changed is that they are addressed via IP, but it's still a strictly local network.
- bisby 4y ago
  > There's no WiFi > Matter uses Bluetooth Low Energy for provisioning via a QR code, while it relies on Wi-Fi for high-data rate connectivity and Thread for low-data-rate communications. So you say no WiFi but the post specific says WiFi. And if there's wifi then I have to set up my network to ensure they don't have internet access, thats not something Im going to leave up to the honor system.
  - ars 4y ago
    The WiFi is in the hub. You should read it more carefully.
    - bisby 4y ago
      Yes. it says "Wi-Fi for high-data rate connectivity and Thread for low-data-rate communications" Wi-Fi in the hub but not in the devices would make no sense. Why have Wi-Fi in the hub if devices aren't going to use Wi-Fi to connect to it? Also I went back, and searched the post for Wi-Fi, and the thing I quoted is the only reference to Wi-Fi. It uses Wi-Fi for high data rate connectivity. IE, a camera transferring data to the hub. so the camera has wifi. You can't transmit data over Thread, it's not high bandwidth enough. No where in the linked post, though, or in the source press release does it mention that Wi-Fi is optional, but other more informed users here have said that it is optional, and only necessary for high bandwidth stuff like cameras, so lightswitches could be Thread only. So some devices apparently won't have it. But many will. Reading the actual CSA press release, it says > Wi-Fi enables Matter devices to interact over a high-bandwidth local network and allows smart home devices to communicate with the cloud. So yes. The goal for the Wi-Fi is both to transmit high bandwidth stuff like camera feeds over local network, but also to allow "smart devices to communicate with the cloud" aka "reach the internet". So yes, the devices _will_ have WiFi. You should read it more carefully.
bisby 4y ago
Yeah. I was very excited about this until i got to "Bluetooth Low Energy for provisioning" and I was like "oh.." and then "Wi-Fi for high-data rate connectivity" was a "oh. no thanks." That's a clear path to the internet and also using multiple radios so that if I lock down one thing I have to constantly worry about others. As it stands I dont see this being a thing that benefits me. It is more likely that this pushes smart home manufacturers away from Zwave, and makes my life worse because now I can't buy IoT devices without granting them internet access. Then I have to go through and start setting up IoT VLANs to quarantine devices, and in some really shitty cases, Ive seen WiFi devices where the app sends a message to a server, and the server sends a message to the device... so I can't quarantine the device without modifying it or losing functionality (see MyQ garage door openers). The industry looks bleak. Agree on all points of preferring Z-wave though and it's also what I use. However, Linus (of Linus Tech Tips) recently redid all the switches in his home with Zwave switches... and they had a firmware issue... And the company refused to publish firmware updates in any way except through "official" Zwave hubs, and not Home Assistant. It eventually got sorted out, but Zwave isn't necessarily intrinsically failproof either.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  > Agree on all points of preferring Z-wave though and it's also what I use. However, Linus (of Linus Tech Tips) recently redid all the switches in his home with Zwave switches... and they had a firmware issue... And the company refused to publish firmware updates in any way except through "official" Zwave hubs, and not Home Assistant. It eventually got sorted out, but Zwave isn't necessarily intrinsically failproof either. Yes, I followed that drama as well and the did eventually make the newer firmware available to HA and similar though that doesn't exactly negate anything I said. For new features/fixes you are dependent on the manufacturer but that's the same everywhere. The big difference is that if Linus' switch company went out of business then his switches would continue to work the same way they always did (bugs and all). But I do agree with you Z-wave isn't perfect and does sometimes require a little more knowledge to work with. Thankfully I'm all set currently (aside from the SmartThings rug-pull that I have to deal with and finally move everything remaining to HA instead of using my ST hub as just a controller from HA) and I'm just going to sit tight over the next few years and see how things shake out before I upgrade/replace any of my gear.
bryanlarsen 4y ago
Being able to work without internet access is a requirement of the standard AFAICT.
RetpolineDrama 4y ago
>My biggest issue with Thread is (AFAICT) it gives each device access to the internet. Uh what? This is definitely not the case with my nanoleaf bulbs..
- FerdSlav 4y ago
  Thread is an IPv6 bearing mesh network; and if you have a border router that has the appropriate IP routing rules, and your firewall allows it, your Nanoleaf bulbs can most certainly reach out to the internet (granted, they only have the concept of IPv6, so a majority of the internet is inaccessible if only because it is IPv4)
  - layoric 4y ago
    Any ideas if the HomePod Mini (probably the most popular Thread border router) grant broader internet access to Thread devices on the mesh network? I can't find any clear info about how this might work or how to test.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    "If you allow the devices to access the internet they can access the internet" isn't really as doom and gloom as the parent is suggesting.
_ea1k 4y ago
Doesn't Z-Wave require a fairly proprietary implementation, that is also having the side effect of propping up the price?
- jcrawfordor 4y ago
  Yes, Z-Wave as as protocol is basically synonymous with a Silicon Labs product line, to the degree that the different versions of the Z-wave standard are more often referred to by their Silicon Labs part numbers (500 series, 700 series). This does seem to hold up the price of Z-wave products but, to be fair, they end up still being pretty competitive with a lot of other options, although usually more expensive than the most cost-optimized WiFi products like Tuya devices.
- thedougd 4y ago
  And at least for a long time held back the quality of open source solutions. There was (is?) frustration in the developer community in not having access to the Zwave spec and documentation.
jcrawfordor 4y ago
As it stands now I don't care at all who made my Z-wave switches/bulbs/plugs This is maybe an optimistic view of Z-wave in my mind... early on quality and reliability problems were nearly universal with Z-wave devices, and today I have a fairly short list of brands I trust (e.g. Zooz) after having been burned by a series of devices with various firmware bugs or just very poor lifespans. The best story I have is the lightbulb that would turn on every time it received an explorer packet, and thus every time my hub at the time ran a heal, which was of course scheduled at 2AM every day and not easy to disable due to the hub's poor firmware. This was years ago, but then there's still a surprising number of Z-wave devices on the market that are just Z-wave, not the poorly named Z-Wave Plus or Z-Wave Plus V2, and thus have significantly inferior network reliability if there are any changes in the environment. In any modestly challenging environment (e.g. battery powered device a few walls away from the nearest powered device) I have gotten used to having to try out multiple products before finding one that was reliable, and that was even after learning not to buy anything that wasn't at least "500 series" (Silicon Labs part number for Z-Wave Plus). Even Enbrighten, a former GE brand and so ostensibly reputable (this of course depends on how familiar you are with the GE of today) is shipping some total garbage that they haven't even bothered to develop real documentation for. Curiously, I've found that some Enbrighten products and Zooz products are physically identical to the degree that I think they are both sourcing some of their hardware from the same manufacturer... but Zooz has very noticeably superior firmware.
- colordrops 4y ago
  I've got about 20 zwave devices by all of the manufacturers you mention on my network and they have all been very reliable after a year of use. I had a lot of reliability issues at the start, but they all ended up being due to two issues: * Signal strength. Getting more repeaters and devices fixed this * Flaky service implementation. Uprading ZWave JS on Home Assistant and adding a monitor that got ZWave JS to ping devices when they were unavailable as made the system very reliable.
- Bedon292 4y ago
  Thanks for the tip about Zooz, they do look nearly identical may have to pick up a few for additional switches. I have had no need for any additional documentation for all of the GE / Enbrighten switches I have installed in my house. Other than how to wire it and how to get it in pairing mode, what else is there?
azdle 4y ago
> My biggest issue with Thread is (AFAICT) it gives each device access to the internet. Thread is a protocol, this is only as true as the statement "WiFi gives each device access to the internet". It _can_ give devices access to the internet, but only if you plug your (border) router into an internet connection. (Or otherwise bridge the networks. Your border router could still have internet access itself without bridging the thread network out to the internet.)
- RHSeeger 4y ago
  Given that most people will use their one and only router for this, it means most of these devices will have access to the internet. Sure, you _might_ be able to prevent it if you jump through hoops (because it really is annoying to setup a second wifi network, at least in my experience) and assuming the devices don't fail if they can't phone home (and we can be sure some will). But everyone is much safer overall if the "common standard used by most people" did not use wifi.
  - happyopossum 4y ago
    > But everyone is much safer overall if the "common standard used by most people" did not use wifi. What wireless protocol has the range to cover an entire house or lot? Bluetooth is sketchy beyond the same room, and I don't want to deploy a dozen hubs just to cover all my stuff...
    - outworlder 4y ago
      Given that many if not most wired devices in a zigbee or zwave mesh can already perform this task (including lowly switches and light bulbs), I'm not sure how much of a problem that is. You only need one hub.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    > But everyone is much safer overall if the "common standard used by most people" did not use wifi. To be clear, Thread is not Wifi.
- 4y ago
Fricken 4y ago
In the 80s my dad controlled the lights in our home using the Radio Shack plug 'n power system. Plug-in switches and the control box would talk to each other by sending signals through the home electrical wiring. There was no need for wifi or Bluetooth or rc or anything funky like that. It was about as dumb as a smart home could get. http://www.trs-80.org/plug-n-power/ http://www.trs-80.org/plug-n-power/
- lsaferite 4y ago
  Good ole' X10 that later became Insteon. I actually have Insteon for all the lights and fans in my house and am quite happy with it's performance. I've been considering a migration, but I'm holding out until I see how Matter/Thread do as an ecosystem first.
  - darkhelmet 4y ago
    I miss Insteon. I know it's kinda-sorta-maybe-alive again but we'll see. Insteon was simple and mostly just worked. Even my wife saw the benefit of the thing.
operator-name 4y ago
It's a real shame that home networking equipment don't have better firewalls or VLAN capabilities. With a simple (open,pf)sense firewall, ubiquity AP you can easily configure a WiFi network that is completely internal and can talk to each other, but not to anyone else.
- sekh60 4y ago
  After reading /r/sysadmin for years I have zero faith in the average user's ability to use such a device. The closest thing I have ever seen was some D-Link router that had the option for a DMZ
  - operator-name 4y ago
    Of course, but I'd also argue that smart home appliances are mainly for those with some technical knowledge, especially configuring them to work together. It's actually no linger uncommon to find networking gear with these features, only that most people just use what their ISP gives them. It's a matter of defaults - isp provided firewall/routers these days commonly come with a guest WiFi mode, and good ones even segregate that network. I can envision an iot mode that would a large minority of users could use. There's always going to be users who don't care, or don't have the technical knowledge, but recognise that stories on /r/sysadmin skew away from the "average user".
- jnwatson 4y ago
  It isn’t exactly home networking, but Ubiquiti’s stuff has good VLAN and firewall capabilities.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  That does not really resolve the problem for cloud encumbered devices Sure I can block them from the internet but if their management requires a cloud server (which many do) then they are bricks
- Semaphor 4y ago
  In Germany, Fritz!Box actually managed to have advanced capabilities like that and still become mainstream. Many people use Fritz!Box routers here, and ISPs often offer them for free with higher contracts. I don’t have one, but my parents do and while I can probably do a bit more with my Ubiquity devices, it’s not that much more and the Fritxbox has a far superior user interface in exchange. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz!Box https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz!Box
sbf501 4y ago
Is it access to the internet, or access to the internet through a gateway (other than the primary router)? That's a big difference.
ben174 4y ago
I am so afraid of the potential of a cyber attack via IoT... with people taking image files from random spots on the dark web and writing them to their rasp pi's without looking at what's on the image, and putting random devices on their network without having any way to explore the code embedded -- it would be very easy for a widescale cyber attack to suddenly be unleashed and very suddenly we wouldn't even know what hit us.
GorsyGentle 4y ago
Agreed, as far as I could tell the thread border router is designed to be opaque to traffic traversing it. I have a huge issue with this. The fact that zwave/zigbee cannot connect to the internet is why I have so many in my home and I'm not as concerned about them. I think I remember looking at the vendors that were involved in Thread and none were privacy conscious. Apple, Google, Amazon, major Semiconductor manufacturers, Samsung, Yale. No-one who actually promotes privacy in standards. I'm gonna guess Thread will be a privacy nightmare with the internet access making it no better than wifi. Lame.
stjohnswarts 4y ago
there's no way to turn it off or block it on a vlan?
Helmut10001 4y ago
Note, you can always set up a Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) as a VLAN for your IOT stuff, and then use a proxy in case you need those to reach some servers outside. It is not a solution for always-on-internet devices, but for stuff like Shellies it works fine.
petre 4y ago
Isn't Thread 6LoWPAN? This should normally require a Thread to WiFi hardware gateway with a IPv4 to IPv4 gateway. I'm sure it also uses private address space.

stavros 4y ago

Does it? This is a pretty big departure from Zigbee, why would they do this? It's very much an antifeature.

joshstrange 4y ago
Please someone tell me if I'm wrong but from reading the wiki [0] everything in there screams "this has full access to the internet". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_(network_protocol) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_(network_protocol)
- stavros 4y ago
  Hm, yeah, it does say "cloud access". I hope they mean just the hub has access, and the devices don't rely on it.
- jcrawfordor 4y ago
  Thread devices cannot access the internet without the cooperation of a gateway device. The topology is ultimately the same as Z-Wave with the devices communicating with a hub and the hub communicating with the internet. Thread is based on IEEE 802.15.4 just like Zigbee, but it uses IPv6 with extensions as the network protocol, for both a more powerful and flexible network protocol and more implementation commonality with existing network stacks. That said, an explicit goal of Thread is to make the implementation of the gateway device easier and thus allow devices to communicate with a backing cloud service with less active participation of the hub... the hub is still "in the loop," but it doesn't need application-specific implementation for every device, it can just forward messages.
  - wlesieutre 4y ago
    I haven't tested, but I'd hope HomePods acting as gateways would be able to toggle internet access. Apple made a whole thing about HomeKit wifi routers (there's like 1 on the market) where you can easily firewall any wifi homekit devices to within your network. Enthusiast solution would be to use Home Assistant as your thread gateway to actually be in control of the connections: https://community.home-assistant.io/t/home-assistant-skyconnect-usb-stick-announced-will-be-compatible-with-both-zigbee-and-thread-including-matter-chip-over-thread/433594 https://community.home-assistant.io/t/home-assistant-skyconn...
    - wlesieutre 4y ago
      For reference, the only HomeKit router listed on Apple's website is the "Linksys Velop AX4200 Mesh WiFi 6 System, Tri-Band" https://www.apple.com/home-app/accessories/#section-routers https://www.apple.com/home-app/accessories/#section-routers
      - spdustin 4y ago
        The last few Eero mesh routers have also supported HomeKit. That’s what I use.
- azdle 4y ago
  From the Matter Spec: > 2.3. Network Topology > [...] > This protocol may operate in the absence of globally routable IPv6 infrastructure. This requirement enables operation in a network disconnected or firewalled from the global Internet.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    Key word there is MAY, not shall... May implies it is up to the manufacture is internet (i.e globally routable IPv6 infrastructure) if required or not.
    - duckmysick 4y ago
      In the next sentence it says "requirement". Confusingly, in legal terms "may" can also indicate a mandatory provision, depending on the context. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/may https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/may

gerdesj 4y ago

"it gives each device access to the internet". I'm sure it's for your own good! I imagine the Matter SIG/Alliance is a who's who of data muncher and fetishists. Let's wait and see what this thing really looks like.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

clairity 4y ago

no, thread is a rebranding (and evolution) of the zigbee protocol, which is a low-power, local mesh network with no inherent internet connectivity. zigbee/thread devices work offline first, with switches that are an integral part of the local mesh network. these devices can also be connected to the internet through a hub/border router, if you so choose. matter is the umbrella brand name for the combo of BLE, wifi, and thread that provides a complete IoT ecosystem. i have a bunch of zigbee devices (mostly ikea tradfri) that i'm eager to upgrade in the hopes that i get more reliability and speed out of my connected devices (mostly lighting).

bombcar 4y ago
Why the HELL do companies and whatnot keep rebranding from something INSANELY EASY to search like Zigbee to something ENTIRELY GENERIC like thread? explodes
- balloob 4y ago
  Because they didn't. The only thing that Thread shares with Zigbee is the radio. It's a completely different standard.
  - lancepioch 4y ago
    Zigbee Alliance renamed themselves to the CSA. Can companies still keep making Zigbee devices after Matter? Sure, it's not impossible, but it's not really going to happen much more than somebody producing anything else obsolete. The fact of the matter is that Zigbee isn't competing with Matter, it's being replaced with Matter. Rebranding may not be the best choice of words, but I think you're missing the point.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Confederate States of America? Ballsy move.
- piceas 4y ago
  I suspect it is desirable as one is supposed to search for the marketed products. The magic smoke that binds the device to the app or blinky lights is of little importance.

ars 4y ago

My understanding is it gives them an IPv6 address, but that does not mean they have internet access unless there is a hub that connects between the two. There's no WiFi, they use Zigbee behind the scenes, what changed is that they are addressed via IP, but it's still a strictly local network.

bisby 4y ago
> There's no WiFi > Matter uses Bluetooth Low Energy for provisioning via a QR code, while it relies on Wi-Fi for high-data rate connectivity and Thread for low-data-rate communications. So you say no WiFi but the post specific says WiFi. And if there's wifi then I have to set up my network to ensure they don't have internet access, thats not something Im going to leave up to the honor system.
- ars 4y ago
  The WiFi is in the hub. You should read it more carefully.
  - bisby 4y ago
    Yes. it says "Wi-Fi for high-data rate connectivity and Thread for low-data-rate communications" Wi-Fi in the hub but not in the devices would make no sense. Why have Wi-Fi in the hub if devices aren't going to use Wi-Fi to connect to it? Also I went back, and searched the post for Wi-Fi, and the thing I quoted is the only reference to Wi-Fi. It uses Wi-Fi for high data rate connectivity. IE, a camera transferring data to the hub. so the camera has wifi. You can't transmit data over Thread, it's not high bandwidth enough. No where in the linked post, though, or in the source press release does it mention that Wi-Fi is optional, but other more informed users here have said that it is optional, and only necessary for high bandwidth stuff like cameras, so lightswitches could be Thread only. So some devices apparently won't have it. But many will. Reading the actual CSA press release, it says > Wi-Fi enables Matter devices to interact over a high-bandwidth local network and allows smart home devices to communicate with the cloud. So yes. The goal for the Wi-Fi is both to transmit high bandwidth stuff like camera feeds over local network, but also to allow "smart devices to communicate with the cloud" aka "reach the internet". So yes, the devices _will_ have WiFi. You should read it more carefully.

bisby 4y ago

Yeah. I was very excited about this until i got to "Bluetooth Low Energy for provisioning" and I was like "oh.." and then "Wi-Fi for high-data rate connectivity" was a "oh. no thanks." That's a clear path to the internet and also using multiple radios so that if I lock down one thing I have to constantly worry about others. As it stands I dont see this being a thing that benefits me. It is more likely that this pushes smart home manufacturers away from Zwave, and makes my life worse because now I can't buy IoT devices without granting them internet access. Then I have to go through and start setting up IoT VLANs to quarantine devices, and in some really shitty cases, Ive seen WiFi devices where the app sends a message to a server, and the server sends a message to the device... so I can't quarantine the device without modifying it or losing functionality (see MyQ garage door openers). The industry looks bleak. Agree on all points of preferring Z-wave though and it's also what I use. However, Linus (of Linus Tech Tips) recently redid all the switches in his home with Zwave switches... and they had a firmware issue... And the company refused to publish firmware updates in any way except through "official" Zwave hubs, and not Home Assistant. It eventually got sorted out, but Zwave isn't necessarily intrinsically failproof either.

joshstrange 4y ago
> Agree on all points of preferring Z-wave though and it's also what I use. However, Linus (of Linus Tech Tips) recently redid all the switches in his home with Zwave switches... and they had a firmware issue... And the company refused to publish firmware updates in any way except through "official" Zwave hubs, and not Home Assistant. It eventually got sorted out, but Zwave isn't necessarily intrinsically failproof either. Yes, I followed that drama as well and the did eventually make the newer firmware available to HA and similar though that doesn't exactly negate anything I said. For new features/fixes you are dependent on the manufacturer but that's the same everywhere. The big difference is that if Linus' switch company went out of business then his switches would continue to work the same way they always did (bugs and all). But I do agree with you Z-wave isn't perfect and does sometimes require a little more knowledge to work with. Thankfully I'm all set currently (aside from the SmartThings rug-pull that I have to deal with and finally move everything remaining to HA instead of using my ST hub as just a controller from HA) and I'm just going to sit tight over the next few years and see how things shake out before I upgrade/replace any of my gear.

bryanlarsen 4y ago

Being able to work without internet access is a requirement of the standard AFAICT.

RetpolineDrama 4y ago

>My biggest issue with Thread is (AFAICT) it gives each device access to the internet. Uh what? This is definitely not the case with my nanoleaf bulbs..

FerdSlav 4y ago
Thread is an IPv6 bearing mesh network; and if you have a border router that has the appropriate IP routing rules, and your firewall allows it, your Nanoleaf bulbs can most certainly reach out to the internet (granted, they only have the concept of IPv6, so a majority of the internet is inaccessible if only because it is IPv4)
- layoric 4y ago
  Any ideas if the HomePod Mini (probably the most popular Thread border router) grant broader internet access to Thread devices on the mesh network? I can't find any clear info about how this might work or how to test.
- Spivak 4y ago
  "If you allow the devices to access the internet they can access the internet" isn't really as doom and gloom as the parent is suggesting.

_ea1k 4y ago

Doesn't Z-Wave require a fairly proprietary implementation, that is also having the side effect of propping up the price?

jcrawfordor 4y ago
Yes, Z-Wave as as protocol is basically synonymous with a Silicon Labs product line, to the degree that the different versions of the Z-wave standard are more often referred to by their Silicon Labs part numbers (500 series, 700 series). This does seem to hold up the price of Z-wave products but, to be fair, they end up still being pretty competitive with a lot of other options, although usually more expensive than the most cost-optimized WiFi products like Tuya devices.
thedougd 4y ago
And at least for a long time held back the quality of open source solutions. There was (is?) frustration in the developer community in not having access to the Zwave spec and documentation.

jcrawfordor 4y ago

As it stands now I don't care at all who made my Z-wave switches/bulbs/plugs This is maybe an optimistic view of Z-wave in my mind... early on quality and reliability problems were nearly universal with Z-wave devices, and today I have a fairly short list of brands I trust (e.g. Zooz) after having been burned by a series of devices with various firmware bugs or just very poor lifespans. The best story I have is the lightbulb that would turn on every time it received an explorer packet, and thus every time my hub at the time ran a heal, which was of course scheduled at 2AM every day and not easy to disable due to the hub's poor firmware. This was years ago, but then there's still a surprising number of Z-wave devices on the market that are just Z-wave, not the poorly named Z-Wave Plus or Z-Wave Plus V2, and thus have significantly inferior network reliability if there are any changes in the environment. In any modestly challenging environment (e.g. battery powered device a few walls away from the nearest powered device) I have gotten used to having to try out multiple products before finding one that was reliable, and that was even after learning not to buy anything that wasn't at least "500 series" (Silicon Labs part number for Z-Wave Plus). Even Enbrighten, a former GE brand and so ostensibly reputable (this of course depends on how familiar you are with the GE of today) is shipping some total garbage that they haven't even bothered to develop real documentation for. Curiously, I've found that some Enbrighten products and Zooz products are physically identical to the degree that I think they are both sourcing some of their hardware from the same manufacturer... but Zooz has very noticeably superior firmware.

colordrops 4y ago
I've got about 20 zwave devices by all of the manufacturers you mention on my network and they have all been very reliable after a year of use. I had a lot of reliability issues at the start, but they all ended up being due to two issues: * Signal strength. Getting more repeaters and devices fixed this * Flaky service implementation. Uprading ZWave JS on Home Assistant and adding a monitor that got ZWave JS to ping devices when they were unavailable as made the system very reliable.
Bedon292 4y ago
Thanks for the tip about Zooz, they do look nearly identical may have to pick up a few for additional switches. I have had no need for any additional documentation for all of the GE / Enbrighten switches I have installed in my house. Other than how to wire it and how to get it in pairing mode, what else is there?

azdle 4y ago

> My biggest issue with Thread is (AFAICT) it gives each device access to the internet. Thread is a protocol, this is only as true as the statement "WiFi gives each device access to the internet". It _can_ give devices access to the internet, but only if you plug your (border) router into an internet connection. (Or otherwise bridge the networks. Your border router could still have internet access itself without bridging the thread network out to the internet.)

RHSeeger 4y ago
Given that most people will use their one and only router for this, it means most of these devices will have access to the internet. Sure, you _might_ be able to prevent it if you jump through hoops (because it really is annoying to setup a second wifi network, at least in my experience) and assuming the devices don't fail if they can't phone home (and we can be sure some will). But everyone is much safer overall if the "common standard used by most people" did not use wifi.
- happyopossum 4y ago
  > But everyone is much safer overall if the "common standard used by most people" did not use wifi. What wireless protocol has the range to cover an entire house or lot? Bluetooth is sketchy beyond the same room, and I don't want to deploy a dozen hubs just to cover all my stuff...
  - outworlder 4y ago
    Given that many if not most wired devices in a zigbee or zwave mesh can already perform this task (including lowly switches and light bulbs), I'm not sure how much of a problem that is. You only need one hub.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  > But everyone is much safer overall if the "common standard used by most people" did not use wifi. To be clear, Thread is not Wifi.
4y ago

Fricken 4y ago

In the 80s my dad controlled the lights in our home using the Radio Shack plug 'n power system. Plug-in switches and the control box would talk to each other by sending signals through the home electrical wiring. There was no need for wifi or Bluetooth or rc or anything funky like that. It was about as dumb as a smart home could get. http://www.trs-80.org/plug-n-power/ http://www.trs-80.org/plug-n-power/

lsaferite 4y ago
Good ole' X10 that later became Insteon. I actually have Insteon for all the lights and fans in my house and am quite happy with it's performance. I've been considering a migration, but I'm holding out until I see how Matter/Thread do as an ecosystem first.
- darkhelmet 4y ago
  I miss Insteon. I know it's kinda-sorta-maybe-alive again but we'll see. Insteon was simple and mostly just worked. Even my wife saw the benefit of the thing.

operator-name 4y ago

It's a real shame that home networking equipment don't have better firewalls or VLAN capabilities. With a simple (open,pf)sense firewall, ubiquity AP you can easily configure a WiFi network that is completely internal and can talk to each other, but not to anyone else.

sekh60 4y ago
After reading /r/sysadmin for years I have zero faith in the average user's ability to use such a device. The closest thing I have ever seen was some D-Link router that had the option for a DMZ
- operator-name 4y ago
  Of course, but I'd also argue that smart home appliances are mainly for those with some technical knowledge, especially configuring them to work together. It's actually no linger uncommon to find networking gear with these features, only that most people just use what their ISP gives them. It's a matter of defaults - isp provided firewall/routers these days commonly come with a guest WiFi mode, and good ones even segregate that network. I can envision an iot mode that would a large minority of users could use. There's always going to be users who don't care, or don't have the technical knowledge, but recognise that stories on /r/sysadmin skew away from the "average user".
jnwatson 4y ago
It isn’t exactly home networking, but Ubiquiti’s stuff has good VLAN and firewall capabilities.
phpisthebest 4y ago
That does not really resolve the problem for cloud encumbered devices Sure I can block them from the internet but if their management requires a cloud server (which many do) then they are bricks
Semaphor 4y ago
In Germany, Fritz!Box actually managed to have advanced capabilities like that and still become mainstream. Many people use Fritz!Box routers here, and ISPs often offer them for free with higher contracts. I don’t have one, but my parents do and while I can probably do a bit more with my Ubiquity devices, it’s not that much more and the Fritxbox has a far superior user interface in exchange. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz!Box https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz!Box

sbf501 4y ago

Is it access to the internet, or access to the internet through a gateway (other than the primary router)? That's a big difference.

ben174 4y ago

I am so afraid of the potential of a cyber attack via IoT... with people taking image files from random spots on the dark web and writing them to their rasp pi's without looking at what's on the image, and putting random devices on their network without having any way to explore the code embedded -- it would be very easy for a widescale cyber attack to suddenly be unleashed and very suddenly we wouldn't even know what hit us.

GorsyGentle 4y ago

Agreed, as far as I could tell the thread border router is designed to be opaque to traffic traversing it. I have a huge issue with this. The fact that zwave/zigbee cannot connect to the internet is why I have so many in my home and I'm not as concerned about them. I think I remember looking at the vendors that were involved in Thread and none were privacy conscious. Apple, Google, Amazon, major Semiconductor manufacturers, Samsung, Yale. No-one who actually promotes privacy in standards. I'm gonna guess Thread will be a privacy nightmare with the internet access making it no better than wifi. Lame.

stjohnswarts 4y ago

there's no way to turn it off or block it on a vlan?

Helmut10001 4y ago

Note, you can always set up a Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) as a VLAN for your IOT stuff, and then use a proxy in case you need those to reach some servers outside. It is not a solution for always-on-internet devices, but for stuff like Shellies it works fine.

petre 4y ago

Isn't Thread 6LoWPAN? This should normally require a Thread to WiFi hardware gateway with a IPv4 to IPv4 gateway. I'm sure it also uses private address space.