Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Two Z-NET controllers on same Z-Wave Network

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by rprade View Post
    I agree that the failures are indeed rare, though my original (Pi B+) Z-Net did corrupt an SD card twice on me during the first few months. I cloned the SD card and kept a spare with the Z-Net, making recovery a 2 minute ordeal The v2 Z-Nets using a Pi3 board have been very reliable. I still keep a spare SD card just in case, but it hasn't been needed. Since mine are all assigned IP addresses by DHCP reservations, the rescue card will work in any of the three.

    For me the purpose of this discussion is just to understand. For my purposes I found it easier to put each of my 3 Z-Nets on its own network. I also don't feel I need redundancy. I have automated backups of the Z-Wave networks in case the controller GPIO card fails, a spare Raspberry board and SD card in case they should fail. I think the odds of the GPIO card failing are vanishingly small.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by John245 View Post
      The amount of redundancy depends on the lifestyle. For e.g if I’m from home I have to rely on the fact that the canopy’s are closed. It is all a matter of risk acceptance. How much risks are you willing to accept.

      Currently I’m in the process of execution a risk assessment for the whole system. Unacceptable risks will be mitigated (for e.g redundant Z-Net). But risks could also be mitigated without additional costs (for e.g. if the wind sensor will not work (which is one of the inputs that decides if the canopy’s should be closed) it will consider the wind speed of a weather site.

      —-
      John
      I don't disagree, but based upon what Rich wrote above, Z-Net redundancy is a little problematic.
      • Both the production Z-Net and the backup have to be current on the network
      • You would have to update your backup controller any time you add, remove or replace a device
      • The backup controller would have to be connected to the network, but powered down
      • In order to switch over to the backup controller, the primary would have to be powered down, the backup powered up and HomeSeer reconfigured to reach the new controller - unless they have the same IP address.
      I have an extremely easy plan to deploy a VM with HomeSeer if my physical HomeSeer server fails. It can be done quickly and remotely as long as I have Internet access. I have not figured any way to automate the task, but the steps are easy.
      Randy Prade
      Aurora, CO
      Prades.net

      PHLocation - Pushover - EasyTrigger - UltraECM3 - Ultra1Wire3 - Arduino

      Comment


      • #18
        By default, the device selection is set to "Auto". In this mode, it figures out which device to assign based how quickly they respond.

        Originally posted by BlairG View Post
        Thanks Rich,
        From your last sentence... are you required to select which Znet controls every node?

        [From the device properties screen you can select which interface you want HS to use when sending commands. By selecting an interface, associations will also be set up to the proper interface.]

        If so is there an advantage to having a secondary controller, as Randy says it is not a true redundant Znet?
        website | buy now | support | youtube

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by rprade View Post
          I don't disagree, but based upon what Rich wrote above, Z-Net redundancy is a little problematic.
          • Both the production Z-Net and the backup have to be current on the network
          • You would have to update your backup controller any time you add, remove or replace a device
          • The backup controller would have to be connected to the network, but powered down
          • In order to switch over to the backup controller, the primary would have to be powered down, the backup powered up and HomeSeer reconfigured to reach the new controller - unless they have the same IP address.
          I have an extremely easy plan to deploy a VM with HomeSeer if my physical HomeSeer server fails. It can be done quickly and remotely as long as I have Internet access. I have not figured any way to automate the task, but the steps are easy.
          I agree indeed you have to update the back-up controller any time you add remove or replace a device (in my case that is not so often)
          I don't agree that you should keep the back-up powered down. In my case I use static IP's and you can use another IP address in your redundant system.

          VM's can be started automatically that will help you. You have the option to keep the redundant system powered on or use WOL. All depends on your requirements.

          Several scenario's are possible. You can ping the Z-Net and decide to power up the redundant system in case of x Ping failures. But you don't mitigate the risk of the Z-wave board not working. So you could also power up the redundant system in case of x failures within y minutes.

          And a lot more scenarios can be applied.

          ---
          John

          Comment


          • #20
            It is important to keep it powered down. If you have 2 Z-Wave controllers with the same node ID and home ID, then the Z-Wave chip is listening for packets destined to that node ID. When it gets something it quickly sends back an ACK (the controller does this, not HS). So you would have 2 controllers acking all your packets, a total mess!

            Originally posted by John245 View Post
            I agree indeed you have to update the back-up controller any time you add remove or replace a device (in my case that is not so often)
            I don't agree that you should keep the back-up powered down. In my case I use static IP's and you can use another IP address in your redundant system.

            VM's can be started automatically that will help you. You have the option to keep the redundant system powered on or use WOL. All depends on your requirements.

            Several scenario's are possible. You can ping the Z-Net and decide to power up the redundant system in case of x Ping failures. But you don't mitigate the risk of the Z-wave board not working. So you could also power up the redundant system in case of x failures within y minutes.

            And a lot more scenarios can be applied.

            ---
            John
            website | buy now | support | youtube

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by John245 View Post
              I agree indeed you have to update the back-up controller any time you add remove or replace a device (in my case that is not so often)
              I don't agree that you should keep the back-up powered down. In my case I use static IP's and you can use another IP address in your redundant system.

              VM's can be started automatically that will help you. You have the option to keep the redundant system powered on or use WOL. All depends on your requirements.

              Several scenario's are possible. You can ping the Z-Net and decide to power up the redundant system in case of x Ping failures. But you don't mitigate the risk of the Z-wave board not working. So you could also power up the redundant system in case of x failures within y minutes.

              And a lot more scenarios can be applied.

              ---
              John
              Randy Prade
              Aurora, CO
              Prades.net

              PHLocation - Pushover - EasyTrigger - UltraECM3 - Ultra1Wire3 - Arduino

              Comment


              • #22
                I Will power it down.


                Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by rjh View Post
                  You cannot do what you did, you will have an unreliable network. Each node has to have a unique node id. If there are 2 nodes with the same ID, Z-Wave will be very confused.

                  To add a secondary controller:

                  On the secondary, erase it first to make sure it has a unique home ID.

                  Then, with the primary active, go to the Z-Wave config page for the secondary and select:

                  "Make this interface an inclusion controller (secondary) on another network"

                  That will cause the interface to be added to the primary network and all existing node information will be copied to the secondary.

                  At this point you can add new devices to either the primary or the secondary.

                  From the device properties screen you can select which interface you want HS to use when sending commands. By selecting an interface, associations will also be set up to the proper interface.

                  Thanks for the suggestion, however I do not have that option in my menu. If I erase the controller, it ALWAYS has the same home ID of my primary. In addition, a little greyed out check box comes up on the new controller that says (make this controller primary) I cannot get it to erase and create a NEW network. It keeps erasing, and creating the same HOME ID. I am at a loss as to how to proceed.
                  Attached Files

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    example

                    Here is what the result of erasing the secondary looks like
                    Attached Files

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Not sure why that happens, it appears to get stuck. Edit one of you back up files and change the home id, first line I believe, then restore, then erase. That will give it a new home ID.

                      Originally posted by fdarden View Post
                      Thanks for the suggestion, however I do not have that option in my menu. If I erase the controller, it ALWAYS has the same home ID of my primary. In addition, a little greyed out check box comes up on the new controller that says (make this controller primary) I cannot get it to erase and create a NEW network. It keeps erasing, and creating the same HOME ID. I am at a loss as to how to proceed.
                      website | buy now | support | youtube

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by fdarden View Post
                        Here is what the result of erasing the secondary looks like
                        I had the same problem. If a controller has a HomeID it is not erased, only the node information. My solution was to take any backup of any Z-Net, then edit the file to have a different HomeID than the primary. Then restore the file to the Z-Net that is to be secondary. This will then allow you to add it as a secondary to your current controller.
                        Randy Prade
                        Aurora, CO
                        Prades.net

                        PHLocation - Pushover - EasyTrigger - UltraECM3 - Ultra1Wire3 - Arduino

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          The controller is suppose to generate a random home id when its erased. I have erased many here and the home id always gets changed, so I am still not sure how it gets stuck at times.

                          Originally posted by rprade View Post
                          I had the same problem. If a controller has a HomeID it is not erased, only the node information. My solution was to take any backup of any Z-Net, then edit the file to have a different HomeID than the primary. Then restore the file to the Z-Net that is to be secondary. This will then allow you to add it as a secondary to your current controller.
                          website | buy now | support | youtube

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by rprade View Post
                            For me the purpose of this discussion is just to understand. For my purposes I found it easier to put each of my 3 Z-Nets on its own network. I also don't feel I need redundancy. I have automated backups of the Z-Wave networks in case the controller GPIO card fails, a spare Raspberry board and SD card in case they should fail. I think the odds of the GPIO card failing are vanishingly small.
                            I working with a facility that's running 13 znets from a single S6 server. 13 separate HOME ID networks. I know there is overlap in coverage. All systems have current backups. Never had a Znet fail.
                            My interest in this thread is in the primary/secondary servers and redundancy. Whereas I feel the separate controllers is the best way to go.
                            Blair

                            HomeSeer: HS3 Pro 3.0.0.548
                            Hometroller S6 | Devices: 832 | Events: 211
                            Plug-Ins: Z-Wave .252 | HSTouch | RFXCOM | UltraRachio3 | Sonos
                            BLLAN | BLPLEX | BLLOCK | NetCAM | Global Cache Pro | Blur-Iris4

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by rjh View Post
                              Not sure why that happens, it appears to get stuck. Edit one of you back up files and change the home id, first line I believe, then restore, then erase. That will give it a new home ID.
                              Editing the file solved that issue, however, I cannot seem to copy the nodes over like your directions indicated. It seems to time out. Once I have restored the secondary controller with the edited backup file, I then attempt to use the secondary network inclusion feature, and it hangs and eventually times out. Any further suggestions would be helpful. I would just run separate nets, but for my use case, a single network seems to make more sense.

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	progress.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	51.6 KB
ID:	1192870

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Looks like i created a bunch of work for myself

                                One of the side effects of incorrectly adding the second controller is that I have lost all my security associations for my secure nodes. Im going to clean up my database, remove and add my secure nodes back, and revisit this with a cleaner Z-Wave config.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X