After reading a few things in the Community Forum over the last week about various ZigBee problems or challenges that we, and especially the Hubitat staff, encounter across a wide breadth of devices..... (not any more than Zwave, just saying)
I ponder the following -
Is there any device agnostic Hub Manufacturer representation in the Standards Body acting groups? Hubitat likely represents the most agnostic player on the landscape that could walk into the room and suggest:
there appears to be no followed standard around x, y, or z (i.e. battery management, measurement, and readings related things)
the standards dealing with a, b, and c, while certifiable, appear to be inconsistently adhered to in the field (after certification)
the ZigBee protocols lack features 1, 2, and 3 which, if a construct was formed, would solve a myriad of real world implementation and resiliency issues (i.e. some mesh & radio related things)
I might be off base with any one of those 3, but my point is...folks downstream of device manufacturing who are trying to help consumers construct HA solutions with these device products have a front row seat at the table of issues that are arising.
How can we get the likes of Hubitat a seat at the table where the standards and certification testing ink is penned? More importantly I guess; would they want one?
And is this all complicated by what has been talked about as the ultimate evolution of ZigBee morphing into something totally different in the not so distant future?
Personally I could think of nothing less satisfying and more frustrating than dealing with a standards body to effect change...
Heck, we have enough of a challenge (lets say almost zero success) in working with manufacturers of devices to rectify any specific issues a given device may present...
This sounds like the type of thing Matter is suppose to solve. A new standard to replace all standards with a big governing body that will keep everything open and allow everything to interoperate.
On the other hand, if nobody does anything, there is no hope of change. I have been a member of a work related committee for years. At first they probably thought I was a nut, or thought I didn't know what I was talking about. But over time, and with evidence, persistence, and support of others who were afraid to speak their minds, the committee eventually changed positions.
Mind you it took a decade or more to get there, but knowing I was right all along sure gave me personal satisfaction. And yes it was very frustrating, and took lots of my time, but the organization and the people it affected by these changes are much better off now.
I hear yah, but putting on the HE Staff hat there's not likely as much payback for that time invested as there would be to the flippin device vendors that should be getting this stuff right and along "Best Practice Lines" in the first place.
Ah, but they aren't exactly unbiased, are they? Their devices are all perfect, and it is Hubitat, Homeseer, Samsung, and other vendors that are wrong.
If there was pushback from independent sources, it might help to guide needed changes.
Something like that would be a good start, but I wouldn't call it a wish list. If you could have this letter co-signed by other hub manufacturers or other interested parties that would carry a lot more weight than a wish list or a complaint letter. This is where the time-suck comes in, you need to contact other parties and discuss concerns and if they will support or co-author this letter or send one of their own. Been there, done that, and I am balder and have more grey hair from it.
