ZBdongle + "stand-alone bridge" .. is this zigbee-setup directly possible, with ZHA?

is this possible?
And does it function well/stable?
Or will the 2 ?coordinators? fight each-other, or make something unstable?

My reason for this:

  • I ONLY have battery-driven endpoint zigbee-devices (Sonoff sensors-etc).
  • I have 27 of these zigbee-devices, and the number will grow.
  • The zbdongle has a max. of 32-devices.
  • and, I don’t want to create new signal-problems, with for-instance “usb zigbee-repeaters”…
  • I wan tto keep it as signal-simple as possible.

My main question:

  • will the zigbee zbdongle (Sonoff E-version) AND “Sonoff Bridge” (stand-alone “hub”) work, alongside each other (in each part of our house - connecting the devices close to each “bridge”)?
    (of course I will set them to separate channels, and make sure, that their channels are as free from interference from for-instance wifi-AP’s, as possible).

No. You can only have one coordinator. Use repeaters to extend or improve your network. Not sure where you got the idea that these would cause issues.

2 Likes

Those USB-repeaters are the backbone of my ZigBee network, they don’t cause interference at all. Besides, almost all mains powered ZigBee devices are repeaters, a dedicated repeater just can handle more devices that a plug or a bulb.

2 Likes

Completely different kettle of fish.

You can run one coordinator for ZHA and one for Zigbee2mqtt but really there is no need.

1 Like

okay. thanks for your info.
it’s hard to understand - because it actually means chaos and lots of “collisions”…
data and signal, from more units, on probably the same channel, at “nearly” the same time (even with small delays… making it totally not-understandable)!

but, I guess, that “flourishing within chaos/interference” is one of the places, where the zigbee-protocol shines.

Wi-Fi suffers from the fact that it is just an iteration of the old 10BASE-T protocol, meaning collision detection. Zigbee is more a store-and-forward protocol, and even that is getting passed by the more efficient Thread protocol.

1 Like

See Guide for Zigbee interference avoidance and network range/coverage optimization

Correct. With zigbee, no need to worry about collisions/interferences among devices among the same zigbee network.

What you need to worry about is the interferences between zigbee and other wireless protocols using 2.4GHz (wifi, bluetooth, microwave ovens, or another zigbee network using the same channel.)

of course.
but, these possibilities are not the reason here!

I wish, that you would decide to make a branch, where native a Windows build was developed.

In NOT doing so, I think our problem lies.
Because we had to find into a server-holding software, in order to run HA as a server…
In lack of better free options and proper advice, we ended up with Virtualbox.

And, USB-HW-connectivity is a challange, in all these environments…
because that the software has to go through at least 1 step/layer og “a chain of layers”, in order to get in contact with for instance an USB-stick (such as our standard & recommended “sonoff zbdongle”.

Stability comes through simplicity…
and, too many layers - plus too many separate pieces of code (add-ons, integrations, etc etc) - in total makes up for A LOT of possible problems.

So - what exactly causes this problem, is nearly impossible to seek out - since all layers has to be present/running, in order to make your “car” running…

so, I have decided to switch away from your poly-element/piece glued-together solution, from all different kinds of supporters - with a multitude of error-combinations…
and, instead go for something just a bit simpler…

So far, this is OpenHAB, which:

  • runs directly on Windows, on top of the integrated and very/full-proven Java.
  • and which has got a more user-friendly way of doing things,
  • and has got much less integrations-etc (giving less error-possibility due to incompatibility in the immense combinations in HA),
  • and which has got good “focused” tools (such as a better “semantic” interface, and a better scripting tool),

OpenHAB is for sure, not as versatile as HA - but it surely is more balanced and user-friendly

  • in that it is less chaotic /big
  • and in that it isn’t for linux nerds! …
  • HA not having native support for Windowsm actually tells me all … you want the “nerding” work - and, you don’t really care about the more “common” user…
  • and, when we (the “semi-professional / not nerdy” people) try to do, what we “on paper” should be avble to do (i.e. run HA through a server-platform) - and then things go wrong…
  • or to put it differently: Then lack of stability becomes an issue!!! … and, then we see ourself, going through a lot of error-seeking advice - … instead of the community just admitting: that “HA actually only runs stable, directly on linux, and typically on a stand-alone machine such as the Pi!”

We even don’t have any other software, running on our dedicated and new WIndows-PC…

  • And, signal-channel interference is absent and under very well control.
  • our philips-hue uses zigbee-ch-25, our sonoff-zbdongle uses ch-11,
  • and our wifi-AP’s/mesh uses wifi-ch-11,
  • and we live in the countryside, with no to very little interference,
  • and the units last time disconnected during the night, where NO microwave-owen or other PC was turned on!,
  • and, the usb-dongle is appr. 1 meter away from the windows-serverm and is placed high, and can physically see the units that it disconnects from!

but, as long as the problem is not seen as anything but a “context-based”; then HA will not change… and “a native windows-version” will not be developed, and users with less/no HW-knowledge will (continue to get to think, that they should just have done this-or-that, to make it all work (stable)…
and or, that they were just not smart enough, to make it all work!

A real shame, because I love your approach and interface, and all the possibilities…

but, it also has to work, with windows! … or at least with a server-solution that is much closer to 100% stable - which is something that should be in focus, and that HA clearly should clearly reccomend or warn against - regarding which one works /doesn’t work /is not stable!

(especially a solution with a “close to native” USB-dongle sw-path - should be recommended - i.e. that works rock-stable, in the connection from HA to the dongle)

And why?: Partly because there is so many windows users, and so many old office-pc’s that are nearly ideal as home-servers. I know, that HA earns money on the Pi-units, but second to this, must come a larger community - making it easier to put pressure on the companies, to make them support HA,

(regarding a server-platform, that natively/fully supports hW-connections /USB-dongles , - my guess is, that such SW probably exists - but probably it is not cheap/free - but, then just write this very clearly! , then people know, what they step into, also economy-wise!)

You can run HAOS on x86 hardware.

If you want to run an inferior system on a vastly inferior OS (really Windows should never be used to run servers) that’s your choice. Even if it was made for the wrong reasons. Good luck, I hope it works well for you. Let a forum admin or moderator know if you no longer need your HA forum account.

There is norhing inferior here…

Each system and software has its ålusses and ninusses…
“inferior”… my god!

not directly.
one has got ro run HAOS (as a virtual machine) rhrough for-instance Virtualbox.

Link:

Yes, directly. HAOS is an operating system, you can install it on any x86 machine. That machine is then running HAOS, not Windows.

well.
we want to do more, wirh the PC.
It is a N100, with 16G-ram &;512G-storage.

That is: some horsepower…

So it runs a Server -Manager (now: Virtualbox),

And will also be running the cooperative/open SW OpenHAB.

And we will be able to expand with more servers etc

  • both rhe"open ones" (the multi-platform SW - OpenHAB-etc
    ),
  • and the “closed ones” (that DEMANDS a Linux-environment/os - i.e
    .SW such as HA).

In other words:

  • we have decided on A REALLY OPEN PLATFORM.

So you are moving the goal posts again :man_shrugging:

While it’s great OpenHAB fills your specific needs, you come across as (to put it very mildly) quite opinionated, but without a deeper technical background. Denigrating HA on the HA forums for things that are not really true is at least borderline trolling.

So just for the record, you can also use Docker on Windows to run HA, or install a Python environment. Or you can run a supervisor like Proxmox on your N100 and start up Windows in one VM and HAOS in another. The possibilities are really endless and it’s OK if you prefer one way (or software) over another – but that is not a fault of the software in question.

So, is it possible? Yes.
Is it straightforward? No.
Can it be done? Yes.
If someone does this, would he or she happy? Not likely.

So, I have to clarify that this is not a joke nor sarcasm: I do believe that HA does not quite fit what you are looking for - in other words, not the best fit for you. My recommendations here would be for you to focus your time and energy on OpenHAB.

You can still come back to HA, some time down the road - to check whether HA becomes a better fit for you, or if/when your situation somehow would change.

Wish you the best on the journey to your ideal smart home.

1 Like