How many S2 devices do you have with secure connections--vs. totally unencrypted?
I'm trying to get a feel for whether or not that's really worth the horrible hassle (probably 5-15 min per device for the removal/inclusion, then another 20-30 min to update all the references--times 36 devices).
Thanks.
I did all of mine s2 defaults (10+). If it’s having issues (as in today with two of them) I’m unchecking everything and reincluding since I been following this thread.
I’ve not looked at hub stats but have been rebooting every couple of nights while I test through it.
If you are willing to be a Guinea pig, I'd be thrilled. 
I personally would kill all device reporting first.
? How so and what kind?
Example on one zwave+ device but I did it on all of them including zigbee. I went into every device and turned it off. The guys in this thread caught it for me and I would say it solved half my problems easy. I’m not sure why the defaults were an issue but no matter.
I also split some of my groups up but they have ballooned as I try and fill out the mesh.
If you are polling a lot everyone will tell you to reduce it. I chopped it back to the devices I was working on and also tried to make sure they were not all running at the same time. I offset the times, watched the log and then put delays in my group rules as the guys have recommended.
The people on this thread have WAY more devices than me and I suspect a way more robust mesh as a result. As much as it might sound like BS that that’s the solve, I am kinda buying into that. It’s the one real difference I’m consistently seeing.
Ah! Yeah, I only have 7 switches, 2 sirens, and 1 multisensor that report those kinds of details.
I've turned off and/or toned down all of that as much as possible.
I really don't want any of the power reporting and only need relatively current temp reporting from a couple devices. So, I don't think I have too much of that going on.
But, indeed, you're spot on with cranking that stuff way down when possible.
A robust mesh is certainly a key thing.
I have a bit over 60 z-wave devices and around 15 of those are battery operated (they don't help the mesh). In a modest 3 bedroom house (not a McMansion by any means ), so the max possible distance to the hub is 40-50 feet. Walls are drywall/wood studs.
So, I'd think I should be able to get a decent mesh going. That's why I'm wondering about the impact of the different inclusion security levels--and wondering if changing them might help.
My set up is a mess right now. Am migrating 2 C-4's + C-5 over to a single C-7 so have 4 "live" hubs running at the moment.
When I started with the C-7 migration I added repeaters on every floor starting from the hub. Then starting with my upstairs C-4 - excluded/included all my Z-wave devices. The migration process went really well only a few mostly self-inflicted glitches.
I guess the point is I would probably recommend starting with some repeaters radiating outwards from your hub before including any real devices. I know my switches also can act as repeaters but for some reason starting with a dedicated repeater works better.
Note: I have a second location where I installed a C-7 and just did straight includes on switches no repeaters. Had lots of difficulties due to various things adding repeaters to the mix actually helped but it was after the fact.
I'm not entirely sure why this is... Also the Ring security extender is inexpensive and works great. The Aeotec 7 repeater is decent but I've had 2 just stop working.
I'm convinced that the 700 series chipset is at best 1/2 baked. I have a 4 gang of Z-Wave Plus devices paired with no security and 2 of the 4 consistently go to 9.6kpbs. One of them then fails to accurately report status. I can run device repairs to get them to 100kpbs. Then they drop back. I've added a Ring extender. None are more than 50 feet from the hub. This didn't happen with my C4. The 700 series has been sold as having lots of benefits. Not seeing any yet. I don't understand why there are so few Zigbee dimmers on the market. Long live Lutron.
That may be true but thankfully we have the ability to update the Z-Wave chipset firmware.
I've got a Ring Gen 2 repeater--and my house simply isn't very large. The farthest point from the hub is no more than 40-50 feet (and, no matter where I put the thing, it doesn't seem to get used). ONE device is using it right now.
This morning, a device 5 feet from the hub through an open door didn't turn on.
Also not happening: a lamp didn't set, another light switch at the end of the hall, and a lock didn't open.
And, while there are comments about "all the things" in that rule, the z-wave actions are spread out over more than 30 seconds.
I could put 20-30 commands out all at the same instant on my ancient ADT Pulse iControl hub--and it never missed a beat.
I'm thinking there's something to SiLabs not having things quite right--but I also am trying to determine if this is related to the S2 security levels.
Yeah I've been noticing some flaky behavior on some of my switches as well. I combine behavior via Maker and Node-RED. Some of my previously working sequences no longer work all the time. Seems like either a latency issue or some sort of message storm (repeated messages). Dunno if its the HE or Z-wave chipset firmware. On my main C-4 hub with .148 I've started to have zigbee issues again. My zigbee network went offline, brought it back up and rebooted and everything seems to be okay. Will be migrating Zigbee over to the C-7 at some point OR maybe just put it on a C-5 hub.
Actually, I suspect that it's not the chipset itself, but all the rules & regulations a 3rd party manufacturer has to look at when wanting to certify their Z-Wave device.
If the device has a 700 series chip it must comply with the Zwave Plus V2 spec:
Any device that does not meet these specs would be legally liable. I would imagine this is strongly enforced by the ZW Alliance or SiLabs but not sure.
As Z-Wave has become an an open standard a while ago, I don't think this still applies, if it ever did?
Anyone please feel free to correct me if this is wrong.
Certification would be revoked if the standard is not met.
Thanks. But I think everyone would be allowed to put a Z-Wave device on the market without needing to certify it before?
The only restriction seems that he's not allowed to print the label on the package/device?
Yep. Many people look for that as a must have.
https://products.z-wavealliance.org/products/3921?selectedFrequencyId=2
Download the Hubitat app
