Good to see Z-Wave making some progress here.
Encouraging news! So is Hubitat’s current implementation of the Z-Wave protocol 100% compatible with Z-Wave LR (assuming that the Z-Wave LR device is also certified 100%) given LR is backwards compatible?
No. The C-7 hardware is compatible with z-wave LR, but supporting it would require new firmware.
I also don't know if the same controller can simultaneously support LR devices and meshed devices.
Z-wave and Z-wave LR devices can coexist on the same controller.
Only supports S2 auth and S2 access, though... S2 just slows things down imo. Good for devices that need it like locks and garage doors, but why should a new light switch be forced to pair securely?
Does this mean that the C-5 is not compatible?
Correct. Z-Wave LR requires a 700-series controller (or later).
Let’s hope that the long time that’s passed since the spec was aired has allowed HE to work on support during their slack time. Hah !
Probably not a bad idea for a network with a theoretical 1-mile range (I'm assuming you're referring to the fact that S2 is required for Z-Wave LR devices.)
I also haven't noticed any slowdowns with S2--and I have lot paired that way, despite some recommendations against it, because that really seems to be what SiLabs was/is encouraging and, probably because of that, was also the default/easiest method for Hubitat (which I assumed most users would do and wanted to reasonably test myself). The significant overhead of S0 isn't there, so what's left is likely firmware oddities, either on the manufacturer's side (I have a device or two where I strongly suspect this...) and perhaps the controller side (SiLabs has released a few updates to the 700-series so far that most people report to have helped with a few specific issues, though not S2-specific). If anything, hopefully this will straighten some of that out for "regular" Z-Wave users...
Agreed, on point. No issues here with S2, I have nearly all my devices paired with S2.
I agree I think SiLabs is focusing on S2 so with the firmware updates it will be even more reliable.
I have a house where I've got about 60-70 Zooz Zen23/24s installed. I paired them without S2 due to my concern about range issues (3 story + basement, built in the 1850's) and network traffic. Have not really had that many issues except a wonky switch or two and some DB corruption which I think the updated firmware helped resolve.
This is the easiest way to show you what I have. The NONE devices are mostly sensors that support S0 only so I paired at none, one ZEN30 that I could not get to pair with S2, and a ZEN25 that has known issues with S2. All the other S2 stuff is mostly Zooz devices, including a few battery powered sensors. The SmartStart paring is great, you just add the QR and power up the device and it pairs itself. Then I delete the code after to prevent any future accidental pairing if I reset a device and want to do a replace.
House is around a 1300 sqft foot print, 2 story plus attached garage on the side which has 2 devices in it.
They did this to make it more secure out of the box, mostly for marketing reasons. But from a technical standpoint it also makes the code base slightly simpler because there's only one pairing method instead of multiple.
Probably not. The LR firmware is a completely different firmware than the non LR one. And my suspicion is that we are currently using the non LR firmware on these hubs.
That is the case on most hubs anyway.
So to include LR support they would probably have to go back and test the hub on the other firmware.
Not to mention they would have to add all the gui elements for LR pairing as well. It is my belief, based on absolutely no actual data at all, that we are probably a ways away from hubitat supporting LR.
Great info thanks for the response!
Given Hubitat’s history of generally not commenting on future development (IIRC, as an example, Matter etc) it seems we will not know until we know. Still . . . Remaining hopeful for the possibility of HE compatibility.
To be honest, if I were HE, I'd probably wait even longer until there is more than a single device that leverages it. Opportunity cost is everything, and unless they know for certain we are about to see an influx of Long Range Devices, they may be better off working on other things and other drivers v.s. limited device support.
But that's very much the business product manager in me speaking.
There is no reason to support LR "today" other than marketing.
Need more devices before it is worth the development time to implement it. In my opinion.
Unless you are just going for a "first" marketing bullet.
We do know, Hubitat has already said what they were doing here, in fairly good detail.
My bad . . . thanks for the link @neonturbo! Great info there
Still, the first line is telling, lol.
Seriously tho, thanks. Lots of great info there (looking down at his feet in shame for being wrong).
BTW, does anyone know if this has already been implemented? The link states that “this is a planned feature for 2.2.6.” I am now on 184.108.40.206.
The code is there.. And tested with the SiLabs dev kit… However a decision to hold off was made as the standard was still being changed and there were no real devices to test with.. This new device listed is not available anywhere and not listed on certified devices yet, so this is obviously early marketing.. But I am hopeful that this may mean a real device soon..