Start a new topic

Local, LAN control

Last week I lost control over my house, for 12 hours, because something went wrong with iTead systems.


Sonoff devices device works flawlessly per se, and I'm very happy to have 13 of them around my house.

But...

I'm beginning to think there's a glitch in their marketing model. I haven't thought for a moment that they want to spy on us, like some else implied in this forum, but every serious usage require redundancy and backup.

We cannot rely on the whole "cloud" model to be always working: too many things can go wrong on the user side, on itead side and, eventually, on the side of the many third party service providers involved (ISPs and Cloud providers above all).

Every digital and/or networking system might stop working every now and then. While we can surely afford not to remotely switch on a light, what about water heating, house heating, door opening, surveillance systems?

I did my best to build redundancy in my installations, but there are two factors that are not easily overcame.

First, some sonoff device might be (and in my case are) difficult to be physically reached: inside walls or up near the ceiling, the onboard switch is almost useless in these cases.

Second, Dual sonoff aren't capable of manually switching the connected devices on/off: if the system isn't working (i.e. they are offline), the only possible solution is to uninstall them, which is not acceptable at all.


iTead (and coolkit) seem to be trying to sell their solution to third parties (other manufacturers who are supposed to relay onto their whole solution, cloud included) which is cool. If I had to, I would guess that's why they are so "cloud-centered": to offer a easy and rapid solution, all included. It's cool. 


But other than toyish usages, without redundancy their solution is unimplementable: I hope they realize this soon (if they haven't already).


The solution that comes to mind is very simple, and a few have already suggested it here: a dual control system. The cloud is great for remote control, but when the app is on the same local network the sonoff devices are, everything should switch to local. Simply put: automatic switching to LAN control.

If I'm home, I should be able to control my devices even if my Internet connection is down.


If they could do this with an open protocol, that would be top. But after all, not everyone of us wants to build his/her own system: I'm cool with their app, they can keep their protocol reserved as much as they want. To me, the only thing that matters is that I don't ever lose control over my house again.


Other than the above, thank you iTead, I'm very happy with your products!


What do you think?








80 people like this idea

I scoured the internet again, and found someone linking this site in one of the other threads

https://blog.ipsumdomus.com/sonoff-switch-complete-hack-without-firmware-upgrade-1b2d6632c01

Has anyone tried building a local control service with this info? I'm at work so I can't verify any of this at the moment

I've seen this sometime ago but haven't had a chance to try it out.  Might do so this weekend because support from Itead is really poor and there is little they will do to help.


The only issue with this is that control with Google Home won't be possible unless you implement more stuff, but that's like reinventing the wheel and ITEAD already have the code to do it... We need to find a way on how to get more feedback from them about this. I've already sent a message on Twitter

I agree but it seems to be apparently clear that these ITEAD guys don't want to play ball.  What they don't understand is that allowing local LAN control frees them of a lot of unnecessary support - especially for the tech-savvy users amongst us.


Yes that's true. And, in fact, the community is so eager to get this they will probably just implement it themselves if ITEAD just exposed the API's and provided some documentation. I, for one, will definitely be keen to write a hybrid local/remote control server for their devices.

In fact, this would actually make these switches more popular among home automation enthusiasts!


1 person likes this

I completely agree. At the moment, ITEAD is the only reputable company with budget friendly and high quality home control devices. The only thing preventing them from being market leaders, is the cloud control and their unwillingness to provide technical support to enthusiasts wanting to help them and themselves. Every time I talk about the products with colleagues, I always say that ITEAD's products are the best you can get for the price, BUT the only trade-off is the cloud control which can't be bypassed.

You're spot on and those are my sentiments exactly.  

I see ITEAD responded to my tweet:

https://twitter.com/ITeadstudio/status/981346940775378944


They said: "We are testing LAN, so this function will come soon. But at the beginning, only some of the models will support."


I've asked for an ETA and will post here if they respond


2 people like this

Thank you for taking the initiative!

This is great news ! So, they are at least working on local control. Thanks for reporting it here.

 

We hope it's great news, because they've been working on it for a long time :-( ...too much time ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pC-ovOfD_0 

There was this video on the FB pages of Itead and Ewelink, but it seems to me that they removed it. 

The video is from January. And today our world is not yet a real Smart Home world with Sonoff, if we are dependent from their servers and with offline servers often. :-/

Great is ITEAD sell us a Raspberry Pi 3 with home crontol server inside! (I like ITEAD Ewekink app).


1 person likes this
I would have thought the unofficial local control mechanisms exploit a flaw in the security to pretend to be ewelink servers. This would suggest to me they are likely to close the flaw with future firmware and devices, if they haven’t already. You can already install android on a Raspberry Pi, so putting the standard Ewelink App on one should be easy. A distinct ewelink server App is a good idea though - as they are already working on local control via the normal app it seems unlikely though. It would solve their likely security concern about allowing third party access to their devices.

1 person likes this

I firmly vote of course for a locallan management of the itead products. As I can read they have had enough time, probably not enough willing. I just saw on their web site a new product POW R2 with some added features, as download cloud data, but no mention about LAN control, more important when cloud servers are off line.
I'll check the ESPurna solution of Gianluca and I'm afraid for mohammad hossein norouzi with the trust on Itead sw development staff.

Login or Signup to post a comment