I didn't want to assume the post was AI, so I asked that in the query I deleted. Given @CuriousB's professional background, it could be original writing, so I took down my question. But AI slop or not, there is a lot of verbiage there that I believe is just plain .. let's be nice and say not my understanding.
In the scenario of Matter over Thread devices controlled by Apple Home today, I don't see what part my wi-fi network plays in that communication, let alone my ISP's equipment. My Thread devices do talk IPv6, but not on my LAN. If I do want to bridge Thread devices to my LAN, that's where a Thread Border Router is used, but the devices aren't connecting directly to my LAN unless they've hacked their way into it.
I've been happily controlling Thread devices with Apple Home for months and not experienced a "trainwreck", "storm", or a "frustratingly complex network engineering task".
I try to systematically disclose when I've used AI to draft a post and I'd rather others did too, but you're right that I stated it as fact rather than asking. Fair.
The TBR collapses N Thread radio devices into one LAN presence, not zero.
What I was saying is that Thread traffic is confined to the Thread mesh, which includes the TBR. The TBR doesn’t arbitrarily relay all of that traffic onto the LAN, nor does every Thread device’s traffic automatically become Wi-Fi traffic. The TBR routes packets between the Thread mesh and the LAN only when required by the destination.
Right, but most of the drama in the above post comes from conflating what happens on the Thread mesh with what happens on the LAN. Speaking generally about Matter over Thread, the Wi-Fi LAN isn’t necessarily involved in the Thread traffic at all. Thread devices communicate over their own Thread mesh, with the TBR routing Matter traffic off the mesh only when necessary.
no no it was AI generated. I should have noted that, my bad. I wasn't offering an editorial on AI's credibility, but I thought some of the points were interesting with what I perceive a dash for the exit doors on ZWave and Zigbee due to Matter. Often the next "new" thing gets a halo effect until deployment stabilizes and reality sets in.
900 MHz is a big plus for ZWave IMO. I do think ZWave has a significant blind spot of not optimizing device links (background scanning to migrate nodes to the fastest/fewest hop routes) instead lazily choosing LWR and stubbornly sticking with it. But you can't argue with the deployed base and advances in 800 series chipset and ZWave LR. I also know from personal experience the newer ZWave library (7.24?), recent ZWave JS improvements and devices migrating to newer libraries combined have improved my ZWave experience. Of course the ZWave cost penalty is also a hinderance.
So I was just looking at what might be some of the warts with Matter (2.4 and thread) that are possibly under reported at this stage vs. what is a well know and improving experience with ZWave.