[HN Gopher] Zigbee and Z-Wave are the best part of my smart home
___________________________________________________________________
Zigbee and Z-Wave are the best part of my smart home
Author : mfiguiere
Score : 132 points
Date : 2024-02-12 13:58 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
| cqqxo4zV46cp wrote:
| Amen to this. So many 'smart home' battles end up being WiFi
| battles. Zigbee is itself not perfect, but I'd much prefer to
| deal with Zigbee problems instead of propitiatory-protocol-and-
| app-probably-using-a-cloud-service-over-WiFi problems any day of
| the week.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| If you have a lot of it it's an ever ongoing war with empty
| batteries and lost pairing though. Every week I have to fix
| some switch, temperature or door sensor...
| alright2565 wrote:
| It's the opposite for me. I have so many problems with Zigbee
| devices dropping off the mesh for no reason and batteries dying
| in 1/10th the advertised time.
|
| Meanwhile my ESPHome devices have never had any issue
| whatsoever.
| blagie wrote:
| ESPHome is fine, but it's not representative of what people
| mean by "wifi devices."
|
| Most wifi devices require a proprietary app, sweep up your
| data to some fly-by-night operation, stop working during an
| internet outage, don't interoperate between vendors, "call
| home," and yet never receive security updates.
|
| Technically, it's 802.11, but by design, ESPHome is closer to
| Zigbee with a different underlying interface (802.11 rather
| than 802.15) than it is to most wifi devices. It's 100% open,
| simple, documented, reliable, etc.
|
| I'd be fine with wifi devices if they were ESPHome
| underneath. Heck, I'd probably set up a separate network for
| HomeAssistant and IoT.
|
| To that point, one major upside of 802.15 over 802.11 is
| battery life. I don't have any battery-powered 802.11
| devices. It is possible to power zigbee devices from mains,
| and on my to do list at some point is to move a few of them
| from batteries to external power.
| jwr wrote:
| Incidentally, I am building my own lighting controllers, largely
| because everything that is out there on the market sucks. Most
| importantly, I didn't want any "online accounts" for managing my
| devices, I didn't want to "agree to our privacy policy, your
| privacy is important" and then share all of my data with a
| company, and I didn't want anything that is Wi-Fi based.
|
| I decided to go with Bluetooth Mesh and so far I'm really happy
| with how it is designed and how it works. It hasn't seen much
| adoption in the consumer space, being mostly used in industrial
| settings -- indeed, its apparent complexity may seem baffling at
| first. But if you start with a good implementation (Zephyr OS on
| Nordic devices), it works very well.
| iforgotpassword wrote:
| I went with zigbee simply because there seems to be a ton of
| devices available, and while many vendors try to build devices
| that don't adhere to default messages so you'd have to use
| their gateways that talk to the cloud, zigbee is simple enough
| to reverse engineer the communication and add support in all
| the open source ha solutions.
| zehaeva wrote:
| I'm very privacy forward with respect to my home networks. I run
| a home zigbee network which does everything I want it to in the
| home. Yes I can't turn the lights on and off from the other side
| of the world, but neither can anyone else.
| srmarm wrote:
| There are still even ways to expose the zigbee stuff, I can
| turn my zigbee lights on from the other side of the world and
| even access it via Google Home but it's on _my_ terms and under
| _my_ control. The actual switch itself is relatively dumb
| (which is a positive in this case!)
|
| (not to say you're doing it wrong btw, just to let others know
| that zigbee can still be linked onwards to the internet from
| the gateway)
| marcus0x62 wrote:
| Home Assistant (or, really, any local HA controller) plus a VPN
| will allow you to control them from anywhere you have Internet
| connectivity without exposing anything to a cloud-based
| service.
| Medox wrote:
| Or a combination of HA + Telegram (bots) that will trigger
| and respond to a /<command>, even with buttons.
|
| Maybe less secure than a VPN connection (e.g. if somebody
| gets control over the channel or bots instead of you/other
| trusted members) and of course more finicky until the bot
| works as desired, but always a nice party trick.
|
| Or a combination of VPN for home-critical automations and
| telegram bots for the simple/shared ones.
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| Between timers and motions sensors, I'm pretty much fully
| covered. There just isn't a reason for me to turn something on
| or off when I'm away.
| santialbo wrote:
| I'm running Zigbee2Mqtt on my Homeassistant and so far it's been
| a very pleasant experience buying devices from different brands
| without having to use each vendors app. The compatibility list is
| gigantic https://www.zigbee2mqtt.io/supported-devices/
| rekoil wrote:
| I've seen a lot of references to Zigbee2MQTT. If I'm going to
| be using it through Home Assistant anyway, why should one
| choose Zigbee2MQTT over say ZHA?
| function_seven wrote:
| I used to run ZHA on my Home Assistant setup, and switched to
| Z2M a couple years ago.
|
| At the time it had a longer list of supported devices, and
| the UI for configuring them was better. It felt kind of
| "dirty" to layer in yet another protocol (MQTT) between the
| Zigbee side and the HA side, but it's worked great.
|
| It could very well be that ZHA today is the same or even
| better than Z2M, but at the time I made the switchover, there
| was some device that I couldn't use with ZHA that Z2M
| supported.
| rekoil wrote:
| I haven't really run across any devices that haven't
| _worked_ in ZHA.
|
| I did recently buy the latest generation of Philips Hue
| Festavia string lights and Home Assistant (via ZHA) had no
| clue how to set any of the scenes on it. I was able to use
| the official app to set scenes via Bluetooth though, while
| still being able to use ZHA to control power and
| brightness.
|
| I believe the product was released very near the Christmas
| period though, so I'm sure it'll have full support in ZHA
| by next year, might just bring em out early and do it
| myself if nobody else has done it by then.
| stavros wrote:
| Same here, but with Z2M. Even some random, no-name, $20
| thermostat works perfectly with Z2M, I can even set the
| week's schedules easily.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| I prefer DeCONZ instead. It's got a really nice UI both the
| web interface for the pairing and a great live network view
| over VNC.
|
| ZHA is much more bare bones. I didn't try the mqtt one but
| I'm not so interested in something that uses mqtt in the
| middle. Another thing that can break..
| rusk wrote:
| I was on deconz, but eventually migrated to Z2M due to
| compatibility issues with some devices. It's a far better
| experience to be honest. Haven't looked back!
| iforgotpassword wrote:
| I can second the sibling comment. I naively started out with
| ZHA for less moving parts in December. Switched to mosquitto
| and z2m a week ago because of one completely and one
| partially unsupported device. It's more involved and if
| something doesn't work you have to check two (three)
| different places now, but it seems worth it.
| santialbo wrote:
| Another silly reason is that unlike ZHA, Z2M doesn't restart
| everytime you restart HA.
| rekoil wrote:
| That's actually a lot more of an upside than it should
| be...
| zer00eyz wrote:
| I like home assistant. There's tons of reasons to use it. You
| get a lot of good enough moving parts out of the box.
|
| MQTT is something you should set up ASAP. There are plenty of
| reasons to set it up: ESPresnse is a big one (can't say
| enough about this offering) AWTRIX is another, even if you
| aren't going to integrate zigbee.
|
| MQTT becomes a cheap and easy way to add data to, and
| interact with home assistant. And, any device that
| communicates over MQTT can be controlled by you (custom code,
| dead easy) outside HA.
| AHTERIX5000 wrote:
| I used ZHA until I encountered devices ZHA didn't support or
| the support was broken yet they worked with Zigbee2MQTT.
|
| That said Zigbee2MQTT isn't without its problems, it's still
| hobby-grade and not hard to crash with cheap and badly
| behaving devices.
| pavon wrote:
| Another minor reason is that AFAIK ZHA has to run on the same
| machine as Home Assistant, while Z2M can run on a different
| machine, and is less resource intensive than all of HA. So
| you can plug the zigbee coordinator usb dongle into a
| centrally located OpenWRT router and run Z2M on it, while
| your Home Assistant machine can be located anywhere that is
| convenient.
| marcus0x62 wrote:
| I've run around 20 Zigbee and an equal number of Zwave devices
| for several years. Zigbee is great. Zwave is terrible: despite
| operating at a better frequency for a home environment (lots of
| walls,) in my experience is has worse propagation, higher
| latency, and an unreliable mesh topology that randomly breaks and
| has to be manually repaired.
| bliteben wrote:
| What zwave devices have you been using? I have only used zwave
| (leviton, ge) and have only had to restart a switch 2-3 times.
| My biggest gripe with zwave was when home assistant switched
| the supported plugin.
| marcus0x62 wrote:
| * GE/Jasco switches (the bulk of my devices, around 10
| total.)
|
| * GE/Jasco outdoor outlet controls
|
| * Schlage motorized door locks
|
| * Linear garage door controller
|
| * Aeotec outlet control
|
| * Aeotec repeater
|
| * Aeotec temperature and humidity sensor
| robalfonso wrote:
| I've found that some people have great zigbee experiences and
| terrible z-wave and just as many are the opposite. I chalk it
| up to individual environments etc. Go with what works best from
| you.
| planb wrote:
| Anecdote from the other side: my zwave devices just work for 8
| years now, while there are times some zigbee devices just don't
| respond. I suspect the zwave network is more stable because all
| routers are powered all the time, while I have lots of zigbee
| bulbs that are behind a real switch so they leave the network
| if I turn the lights off. There seems like to be no way in
| zigbee from preventing those devices to be used as routers.
| iforgotpassword wrote:
| I've read zigbee really doesn't like routers that aren't
| available 24/7 so I'm planning on avoiding this.
| yanellena wrote:
| Yeah Zigbee routers need to be on all the time, if you turn
| them off, other devices will start to form connections with
| other mesh nodes and will fail unexpected when you flip the
| switch back on.
| somehnguy wrote:
| Interesting, maybe your ZWave dongle is not the greatest? I
| also run a mix of ZWave & Zigbee with their own appropriate
| dongles plugged into my Home Assistant server and they've both
| been great. No issues with devices dropping or needing to
| manually repair anything.
|
| For both I use a 6ft USB extension cable to mount the dongles
| up on the wall behind my server instead of hanging out of the
| USB port.
| jauntywundrkind wrote:
| There's also many generations of zwave specs. Everything is
| backwards compatible but perhaps perhaps perhaps the presence
| of older devices might slow down or degraded what newer
| devices might otherwise be speaking.
| marcus0x62 wrote:
| It has been consistent across the following hubs/zwave
| adapters:
|
| Micasa Verde
|
| Smart Things
|
| Hubitat
|
| Home Assistant with the Zooz Zwave radio.
| malermeister wrote:
| Zigbee and Z-Wave are the best, I agree. Inherently local-only,
| so no cloud that sends your data god knows where and can be
| turned off without any notice. A standard system, so you can buy
| stuff from any manufacturer and be sure it works with your hub.
|
| It's what smart home should be.
| alistairSH wrote:
| The only "catch" is if you want to use a voice assistant/smart
| speaker, which is either built into the hub, or requires a
| integration.
| r2_pilot wrote:
| I rolled my own several years ago with Voice Attack and
| python
| malermeister wrote:
| rhasspy is a popular open source solution - I've used it
| before, but I'm not sure if it's still in development
| wlesieutre wrote:
| What happens if your gateway dies and has to be replaced?
|
| From what I've read, this _theoretically_ can be done, but in
| practice you end up unlinking and migrating every device one by
| one.
|
| But it's been a few years since I looked into it, maybe someone
| has made improvements? Otherwise, this is a huge advantage of
| wifi-based smarthome devices.
| LeafItAlone wrote:
| I just replaced my Ikea hub (changed from Tradfri to Dirigera).
| It was annoying to do, but not hard. Took about ~90 seconds for
| each device. I did them individually, but I could have done
| them in parallel to speed it up.
|
| Not something I want to do once a month, but once every two
| years is "reasonable" (compared to non-smart home items).
| Klathmon wrote:
| So for zigbee this is very possible and I've recently done it
| multiple times without any issues whatsoever.
|
| I used to use a ConbeeII as my zigbee coordinator, but my
| server rack is located at an awful position in the house for
| coverage, so I picked up a TubeZB PoE EFR32 based coordinator
| [1] which has been incredible! I use home assistant, and it was
| trivial to backup the network, unplug the ConbeeII, put in the
| IP address of the new coordinator, and import the backup there
| and everything just continued to work.
|
| Then I had that die, it was actually the PoE portion which
| died, so I did the reverse and transferred everything back to
| my ConbeeII while I diagnosed and fixed it, then when it was
| fixed transferred everything back to the TubeZB coordinator.
|
| It actually took longer to get the IP address assigned on the
| TubeZB coordinator than it did to transfer my network each
| time, it was incredibly simple.
|
| I'm not sure for z-wave though. I do use it, but I've never had
| a z-wave gateway die on me, or had any reason to replace it
| where I wasn't also moving or something.
|
| [1] https://tubeszb.com/product/efr32-mgm21-poe-coordinator/
| wlesieutre wrote:
| Good to know! One of the more specific things I was wondering
| is that when you relinked everything if HA would forget
| what's what or if it would hook the devices back up to all
| their automations afterward.
|
| I have some Hue bulbs which are Zigbee, but I've been
| considering getting out of Hue's ecosystem for controlling
| them.
| Klathmon wrote:
| The names seemed to reset for some of my zigbee devices
| (interestingly not all of them, just some of them, it's
| likely something else going on and unrelated but I don't
| know for sure), but they still work in their original
| automations and in my UI everywhere that I have them.
| mannyv wrote:
| I believe the re-pair process is a side effect of how security
| was implemented. I also heard it was technically possible to
| migrate without pairing, but i think right now it's between
| hubs from the same manufacturer. It's been years since i
| checked.
| alistairSH wrote:
| Zwave devices definitely seem to be "sticky" - you have to
| unpair/pair each device. At least that's been my experience
| using Zwave with a Smartthings hub.
| ab_goat wrote:
| I've been using Z-wave devices since 2017 for the following:
|
| 1. Dimmer lighting 2. Door sensors 3. Relays to customize radiant
| flooring better than thermostats 4. Seasonal lighting (outdoor
| string lights/Christmas tree) 5. Thermostat
|
| Overall it's been a good experience, however I think the
| SmartThings app is a pain in the butt and should be a much better
| experience.
| edude03 wrote:
| (I've been running home automation stuff for ~10 years now but) I
| am little surprised the author thought wifi/bluetooth would be
| better than technology made specifically for (home?) automation.
| To me meshing is a natural fit for interconnecting devices all
| around the house vs the hub and spoke model that wifi has.
|
| Furthermore, I (read) and kind of disagree that thread/matter is
| a mess, but I'm coming from the point of view of an engineer who
| is keenly interested in home automation tech; for the typical
| consumer that's probably a fair take.
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| Thread and matter are a mess from both technical and consumer
| angles. Yes, they are both good technologies...but the players
| in the hub space have made an utter mess of it if you have
| multiple hubs or, like most Americans, use an iPhone but have
| Nest or Echo devices. Then you have the lack of adoption of
| thread in general. And finally, Matter support being always 6
| months away for everything or just straight up not working. It
| is mind blowing to me that it was easier for me to set up my
| Wiz bulbs to work in Homekit via HA than to get them to
| actually frickin work over Matter...seeing as the Matter logo
| was on the box when I bought them.
|
| Honestly, I'm kinda shocked that no hub company has shipped a
| Cheap Zwave/Zigbee integrated HA hub. Sure you have HA Green
| and Yellow and all that, but you could get that price way down
| with a simple partnership and purpose built hardware that is
| elegant.
| Xelynega wrote:
| I think an integrated hub would be a bit extra tbh.
|
| Amazon sells a coordinator usb for $20, so pair that with
| anything that can rub home assistant(raspi, ha green/yellow,
| old laptop, etc.) and you have a ZigBee hub that's plug and
| play for ZHA and Z2M.
| edude03 wrote:
| Yeah, not having a way to share keys between thread networks
| I think is the biggest technical challenge for the user/user
| experience. Home Assistant for example is able to import keys
| from an iOS device using its app and join a HomeKit thread
| network, but I don't know if that approach is scalable.
|
| > Cheap Zwave/Zigbee integrated HA hub
|
| The ikea Dirigera and smartthings hub have great HA support
| from what I understand, I'm not sure what'd it take to get
| the HA logo slapped on the box and have them officially
| supported though
| Xelynega wrote:
| I haven't looked too much into thread/matter, but my
| understanding of them has been basically this:
| https://xkcd.com/927/
|
| I shudder at the idea of ipv6 addresses for my lightbulbs.
| edude03 wrote:
| From what I understand the benefit of ip addressing for IoT
| things is that apps on your phone (for example) can
| communicate with them directly, ignoring the underlying
| transport (and therefore, no need to have a thread radio in
| your phone for the manufacturer specific app to work)
|
| I've always found that the most reliable combination is the
| Manufacturers app + hub + IoT devices (for example all Aqara
| or all Nest or all Hue) and interop hasn't worked great
| because there are special features that only work with the
| app made for the device (which again, only works with that
| manufacturers hub) so thread should fix that by making the
| hub just a dumb Zigbee to IPv6 adapter.
| tremon wrote:
| _the most reliable combination is the Manufacturers app +
| hub + IoT devices_
|
| This means that the standard has failed to be an actual
| Standard, and thread/matter really is a big mess.
| bombcar wrote:
| The main thing I've learned from this smarthome stuff is make
| sure your light switches also work when damn near everything but
| the power itself is off.
|
| Really annoying not being able to turn the lights on or off
| because something (doesn't matter what) is not cooperating on a
| software level.
| Avamander wrote:
| Yea, the behaviour I want is always just to enhance not
| replace.
|
| This is why I dislike smart bulbs with dumb switches and
| similar bad combos. Smart home appliances shouldn't hide any
| features behind an app either. But every manufacturer has
| perverse incentives to push their apps.
| bombcar wrote:
| Things have regressed - the older Hue stuff could have
| switches that had no batteries (pressing the button generated
| enough electricity to send the signal) and they could
| communicate directly with the gateway _or even the bulbs_.
|
| Now everything is wifi or bluetooth and it sucks.
|
| Five years ago I would have designed a new house entirely
| around these things; now it would be so old-fashioned it
| wouldn't look out of place in the 1950s.
| xrd wrote:
| Yes, it is insane how these things work. We bought a 60s
| house which presumably had bad wiring. The sellers elected
| to use "smart bulbs" and "smart switches" for everything to
| probably save money on the rewiring cost.
|
| The thing you never realize, is that for each extra
| communication protocol and endpoint you add, you need to
| then troubleshoot across all the permutations.
|
| So, if you are only using a wire to connect to another
| wire, there is only one path that can fail, the wire
| between them. Electricians are good at troubleshooting
| that.
|
| If you add a wifi access point, and a smart bulb router (or
| whatever the fuck it is) and then you add a wifi extender,
| when things fail, which path did it take when it failed, or
| when it worked? The permutations you need to troubleshoot
| are suddenly an N^4 problem. Get your graph theory
| textbooks out and study up on the traveling salesman
| problem.
|
| That's why we have had electricians come by who cannot
| figure out why when we push the wifi light dimmer button in
| one bedroom, that the other bedroom lights turn off. It
| just started happening a few months back. It's absolutely
| maddening.
|
| All these smart devices are awful. As a related aside, our
| Amazon Ring devices no longer allow you to connect to their
| wifi with the Amazon Ring app, and we have a bunch of
| cameras that are dead once the power goes off. Used to be
| you could just join their temp wifi connection, register
| the device on the home wifi, and go. They turned that off.
| Now, they all say you need to get the QR code, but we
| cannot find that on the devices, so they are bricked. I'm
| sure this is because probably someone found an open wifi
| Ring camera, added it using their phone when they walked
| by, and spied on the family. But, I don't really care, I
| just know cameras are sitting there unusable by me, until
| some hacker walks by and figures out how to register them.
| I won't be spending anymore money on Amazon cameras, but
| I'm sure Amazon would be happy to have me just buy new
| ones.
| WirelessGigabit wrote:
| I have one place like this. There is no connection from the
| switch to the lightbulb. If the network is down, no lights.
|
| I have some TP-link press-switches (so no on-off, just press to
| invert state), and they work amazing.
|
| They work when the network is down. And you can read the state.
| Even if you turn off the network, flip the state, and turn it
| back on, it works correctly.
| doubled112 wrote:
| > I have some TP-link press-switches (so no on-off, just
| press to invert state), and they work amazing.
|
| I just bought a 2 plug smart plug and this was a major
| selling feature.
|
| What happens if I'm standing there and I don't have a device
| on me? I just press the button like I would anyway.
| devnulll wrote:
| The key engineering point here is about failure modes. If the
| failure mode is a brick, then the engineering and design team
| behind that switch has failed.
|
| The failure mode for a smart switch needs to be a "classic"
| switch. This applies equally to garage door openers, showers,
| door locks, and the rest of the smart devices.
|
| Note: I'll give a bit of a pass to smart window blinds as a
| selling point is lack of strings and cables and the therefore
| look cleaner.
| bombcar wrote:
| It's like the failure mode of elevators vs escalators - the
| elevator fails and it's useless, the escalator fails and it's
| just a flight of stairs.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| Not necessarily so. (Warning, video of a bunch of people
| getting injured): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qE2Lv-t9BHk
| bradhanson wrote:
| Check out the Shelly products. They use local control of a
| relay using standard switching hardware, so if your network is
| broken the lights still work as normal. Technically the switch
| isn't actually switching the power so there's _some_ element of
| electronics between you and mains power, but it's close enough
| for me.
| bombcar wrote:
| I've started using these switches:
| https://assets.lutron.com/a/documents/369987_eng.pdf as they
| work fine with the network off.
|
| Amusingly enough the failed Best Buy product line still work
| great with Apple HomeKit (and manually) - even though they
| discontinued the cloud service and refunded all purchases as
| gift cards.
| eddieroger wrote:
| I went with Lutron Caseta switches (though they're not the only
| ones that do this) for that reason. When all else fails, they
| are just dimmers and remotes that talk to said dimmer. When I
| want them to be more than that, they work with HomeKit and Home
| Assistant just great. But Lutron is a switch company first and
| foremost, and that shows in these switches. They surpass the
| Partner Acceptance Factor.
|
| I'd add to your advice and say "do as much as you can to keep
| the experience vanilla," which in this case means standard
| fixtures and bulbs, just replacing the switches. For the price
| of half of one Hue bulb, my whole fixture is smart now, and I
| can still use whatever bulb I want.
| ydant wrote:
| Have you found LED bulbs that dim nicely with the Caseta?
|
| It's been a few years since I've tried, but in the past I
| went through so many bulbs that whine when dimming that I
| gave up and put in smart bulbs where I can conceivably hear
| the bulb. Which means I've got switches that don't work
| properly if the hub is down.
|
| I love the Caseta otherwise. We use it for recessed cans and
| the whine is just not quite noticeable. But, e.g. over my bed
| it's very noticeable. Maybe newer models of Caseta solved
| something and the bulbs aren't the solution?
| bombcar wrote:
| Dimming is _always_ the problem. I 'm so fed up with bulbs
| in general that I may next time just wire multiple bulb-
| holders instead of one in each area.
|
| The dimmable room that is working "best" is the one where
| everything is Hue and controlled "together" but it has
| issues when the Internet is down. The push-button switch
| they no longer make works decently well even then
| (sometimes): https://meethue.co/products/philips-hue-tap/
| WorldMaker wrote:
| Related to this, I still think think the original version of
| the Hue Tap switch was clever and I'm still surprised didn't
| have more clones and didn't entirely survive the internal
| revision wars/external protocol wars: the original didn't use a
| disposable "button" battery and instead used mechanical energy
| of pushing the button to power sending the Zigbee signal. It
| takes more force than a regular light switch to hit it with
| enough physical power, but it's also kind of satisfying in the
| way a mechanical keyboard button can be or a big chonky "snooze
| button" that you kind of want to smack with some force anyway.
|
| I've heard it said that sort of mechanical powered switch with
| Thread/Matter is much harder, except with these old existing
| ones in bridges with old Zigbee compatibility, and more's the
| pity. It still seems such a good idea to me, one less battery
| to waste/go bad at exactly the wrong time.
| bombcar wrote:
| It was a phenomenally amazing idea, and I'm really sad it was
| discontinued. When I realized how it did the magic, it almost
| singly-handedly sold me on Hue (their stupid upcoming app
| account requirement unsold me, let me tell you).
| WorldMaker wrote:
| Yeah, I'm not thrilled about that account "requirement
| change" either. To be fair, for various different reasons
| over the years, I've used third party apps a lot more than
| the main Hue apps, so this may just be a push to switch
| back to third party apps again and/or finally upgrade from
| a Hue-only bridge to something like Apple Home Hub, which
| I'd been considering lately anyway because Apple HomeKey
| sounds like something useful to me (I'm less likely to
| forget my watch than my keys these days).
| otterley wrote:
| I would very much like to adopt Zigbee at home since it has the
| privacy and reliability features I want. The problem is the
| market: there just aren't enough equipment options out there, and
| the few that are available are nontrivial to acquire (and who
| knows how long the vendors will survive). Sure, I can get some
| light switches, but not at my local home supply. And light
| switches are just one type of controller. I've got shades, door
| locks, thermostats, and more. The choices are so few. Sure, maybe
| an example exists, but if I don't like the ergonomics or style,
| well, too bad. It's like shopping in the former Soviet Union.
| joshstrange wrote:
| This is the advice I give everyone who is interested in smart
| home stuff: Pick Zigbee or Z-Wave and only buy that type of
| product, WiFi is trash.
|
| I'm not super keen on Thread/Matter seeing how one of its goal
| seems to be allowing your devices access to the internet which is
| the exact opposite of what I want. I want my devices to be dumb,
| only able to talk to the hub, and then the hub can optionally run
| some code to connect outside the network if and when I decide.
|
| The best part about my Z-Wave setup is every manufacturer can go
| out of business and I won't even notice. That's a stark
| difference to something WiFi based which almost always requires a
| cloud component. I understand why people start with WiFi devices,
| they don't need a hub, but having a local hub is the best way to
| do anything "smart home" by far. Personally I use Home Assistant
| but before that I used SmartThings and liked it well enough.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| Thread is based on Zigbee. It functions fine without the
| internet.
| abollaert wrote:
| I thought both Thread and Zigbee run on top of IEEE802.15.4,
| but Thread is based on 6LoWPAN / IPv6 where Zigbee uses its
| own network layer. But Thread idd functions fine without the
| internet (although you probably could connect devices to the
| internet if you'd want to).
| ianburrell wrote:
| Also important is that Zigbee is both the transport
| protocol and multiple home automational protocols. Zigbee
| compatibility is pretty good with the same protocol but not
| across different protocols.
|
| Thread is a transport protocol for Matter home automation
| protocol. Matter is complex because it tries to do
| everything in one protocol.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| Thread is based on Zigbee in the sense that the thread
| designers read papers about the Zigbee spec. Also matter is
| partially based on Zigbee with its use of Zigbee clusters
| (deep in the stack, away from end users).
|
| Zigbee and thread are different protocols and incompatible.
| You cannot mix them and that's what most people are about.
| ashman5 wrote:
| I use both and both work well. There a pos/negs to both, Zigbee
| tends to be cheaper, but there is a complete lack of dimmer
| plugs.
| somehnguy wrote:
| I use both as well and see no reason to pick only one or the
| other. The USB stick hubs are very cheap and Home Assistant
| does all the heavy lifting seamlessly. Having both gives me
| pretty much unlimited flexibility.
|
| For devices I usually pick whatever standard has the device I
| want at a more reasonable price or is on sale. So far I've
| yet to run into a scenario where I wish I had chosen the
| other standard for a specific device.
|
| I also have a ton of devices on WiFi via Esphome on both
| esp8266 & esp32. Fantastic project, years of them running
| completely trouble free.
| happymellon wrote:
| I have dimmer switches, and I only have Zigbee.
|
| Candeo are pretty reliable.
| bradgessler wrote:
| There's really good WiFi smart home hardware out there, like
| anything Leviton ships I'd recommend. There's also a lot of
| crap out there too.
|
| I think the ideal smart home device can connect to the internet
| to check for updates either when I manually want to update it
| or setup an auto update schedule. An account should NOT be
| required, which sadly lots of smart home hardware requires.
| ssl-3 wrote:
| But reality seems to be more nuanced than that:
|
| Matter devices can be "dumb". They're intended to be able to
| work without Internet. Matter uses IP, and Thread provides
| IPV6, but that doesn't mean that either thing needs to be able
| to talk to the WAN.
|
| Wifi devices can also be "dumb". For example: I have ESPHome
| devices that Just Work and that don't have any outside
| connectivity.
|
| I don't advise anyone who asks me about smart home stuff. I'll
| tell them some about what I'm doing in my own home, and answer
| any questions they have accurately, but their eyes glaze over
| when they hear phrases like Zigbee or MQTT, and they've
| completely stopped listening by the time something like Home
| Assistant comes 'round.
|
| I don't know that Matter and/or Thread will make anything
| better or more secure by default. The Matter 1.0 spec is only a
| year and a half old and it isn't clear at all how
| implementation is going to wind up being shaped in the real
| world.
|
| But they _can_ improve things and I hope that they will.
| windows2020 wrote:
| There are some fantastic products (LIFX, Twinkly) that are WiFi
| and don't require the cloud. Zigbee falls apart when
| controlling a large number of devices in real-time.
| billfor wrote:
| I've used Tasmota with Wi-Fi and mqtt and it works great.
| Lendal wrote:
| I use Hubitat but everything is Z-wave except for one Alexa-
| only bulb, which was a gift so I can't get rid of it.
|
| What I've learned is that smart wall switches of all types are
| still too failure-prone for me. Now I'm converting back to
| standard wall switches with Z-wave relays wired in behind them.
| I don't like the extra lag they have, but I do like that
| standard wall switches last forever compared to smart wall
| switches.
|
| If anyone knows how to reduce the lag, I'm all ears. The switch
| operates the relay which sends its signal to the hub, which
| then sends a signal back for the light to turn on. This process
| introduces a noticeable time delay between the switch closing
| and the light coming on.
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _I 'm not super keen on Thread/Matter seeing how one of its
| goal seems to be allowing your devices access to the internet
| which is the exact opposite of what I want._
|
| Happily, that's not a goal and definitely not a requirement.
| Thread/Matter work great without internet access unless you use
| them via a platform which does (e.g. Alexa).
| vineyardmike wrote:
| Most commercial platforms, which people will realistically
| use, are border routers. IP routers with internet access.
|
| Beyond that, the protocol allows for logs to be uploaded to
| your ecosystem of choice, and allows for OTA installation of
| software updates.
|
| Internet access is not a requirement for protocol, but
| neither is any other part of the modern "networked software"
| stack. Good luck with your internet-disabled SMTP server.
| aeturnum wrote:
| I think your attitude is almost exactly right but I will add:
| you can pick both. The two ecosystems don't really step on each
| others' toes and as long as you find a hub(s) to feed a single
| view there are basically no downsides.
| vanviegen wrote:
| I can think of two downsides:
|
| - Harder to get coverage. Both zigbee and zwave use mains
| powered devices (like light bulbs) as signal relays for other
| devices. If you're using both, you need to ensure proper
| coverage for both networks.
|
| - No protocol native groups and scenes. At least zigbee
| allows you to set any number of bulbs to a certain scene
| using a single fast broadcast command. When using something
| like Home Assistant to unify both networks, recalling a scene
| will cause each individual bulb to be sent a separate
| command, which can be sloooow when you have many bulbs in one
| room.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| In my experience it's more nuanced. Some of my most unreliable
| devices are Zigbee (but they're also Aqara, and that may well
| be the real problem there). My Z-Wave devices have been pretty
| solid once configured, but they were also some of the most
| finicky to get paired up and on the network. My WiFi switches
| have been rock steady, not a single problem.
| stavros wrote:
| I got a Sonoff Zigbee USB dongle to use with Zigbee2MQTT and
| it's been bulletproof. It even managed to upgrade my finicky
| IKEA Zigbee devices to rock-solid firmware versions.
| 35mm wrote:
| I can also vouch for the Sonoff
| JshWright wrote:
| If you're using 2.4GHz WiFi, then consider Z-Wave. It's a
| little pricier, but doesn't use the same chunk of RF spectrum
| (so won't cause interference).
| 35mm wrote:
| Also wifi devices always seem to want a special app or account
| registration first, whereas with Zigbee you just allow new
| devices and then turn on your new device.
| zamalek wrote:
| > Pick Zigbee or Z-Wave
|
| Picking both is fine. Zigbee is significantly cheaper, but you
| have to make sure that the device is interoperable (Ecobee is a
| good example of a manufacturer to avoid - Zigbee
| interoperability _is optional_ ). If not, that's where Z-Wave
| steps in. Having an "off-brand" Zigbee adapter is a good
| bullshit force field. I use the Aoetec USB for Z-Wave and the
| Sonoff USB for Zigbee. Both are incredibly interoperability
| conscious, so I have no problem supporting them (I also have a
| lot of Zooz devices, who are equally awesome).
|
| All the WiFi devices went to Goodwill.
| SI_Rob wrote:
| Shelly's WiFi devices are all fairly cloud-optional - you can
| completely disconnect the internet and they will all work with
| Home Assistant just fine. Still, I'm not as excited about them
| as I used to be (mainly due to realizing there's a ton of cool-
| looking I/O flexibility they have that ends up being redundant
| once you settle on a control plane for wifi - MQTT in my case),
| and because their exposure of features and properties is
| somewhat inconsistent across device families.
|
| But as a way to unburden your (usually one and only) Zigbee
| channel from certain types of chatty messaging, such as high-
| accuracy presence sending or complex lighting curve adjustments
| that can't be done ergonomically (or at all) via Zigbee, they
| are invaluable. Wifi (jailed in a VLAN, if you like) also
| provides a layer of failure protection should your Zigbee
| coordinator die unexpectedly.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| That was my approach as well when I invested some years ago in
| various dimmers, heater controllers and such.
|
| One positive with Z-wave is that fallback is built into the
| protocol. So the switches can talk directly to the appropriate
| dimmer if the controller is down, for example.
| CharlesW wrote:
| For people who haven't started their smart home project, my
| advice is to focus on Thread and Matter. Regardless of growing
| pains, Thread and Matter work today, have momentum, and are
| clearly the future.
|
| (Note: The negative article the author linked to under "Matter
| and Thread are a big mess" to support his position was written by
| the same person.)
|
| Z-Wave was a pre-IP proprietary standard that was forced towards
| standardization (Z-Wave Alliance remains a gatekeeper), but its
| future is unclear at best. Thread and Matter are the spiritual
| descendants of Zigbee, all of which are based on IEEE 802.15.4.
|
| Also, I've seen posts praising the old protocols because they
| allow local control, but those concerns are unrelated. Alexa
| supports Thread and Matter but does _not_ support local control,
| while HA and HomeKit support Thread and Matter and _do_ support
| local control.
| dm_me_dogs wrote:
| HomeKit-over-Thread and Matter-over-Thread has been pretty okay
| in my experience, using HomePods and an Apple TV 4K as the
| border routers. I'm using Home Assistant, and the HomePods
| control everything nicely. Setup is a little weird (you have to
| set up your devices in HomeKit first, remove and then add again
| in Home Assistant without resetting) but they work great. My
| only complaint is that HomePod Software and tvOS updates tend
| to bork the devices until I reboot HA, but that takes 10 ish
| seconds so not a big deal.
| santialbo wrote:
| I tried that and gave up. Get ready to spend a lot of moeny,
| sensors and devices are still very expensive compared to the ZB
| counterparts. Most Matter devices go with Wifi rather than
| Thread which makes your wifi network implode if you plan on
| installing a large number of them. For that reason I decided to
| go with what's cheap and works today, which is Zigbee.
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _I tried that and gave up. Get ready to spend a lot of
| moeny, sensors and devices are still very expensive compared
| to the ZB counterparts._
|
| When you compare apples-to-apples, there's no price penalty
| -- for example, a Leviton Decora smart dimmer is $56 for
| Zigbee or $50 for Matter. Kasa's Matter dimmer switch is $27,
| and I see $3 Matter devices on AliExpress. Matter and Thread
| don't currently match Zigbee in terms of device diversity,
| but that's just a matter of time.
|
| > _Most Matter devices go with Wifi rather than Thread which
| makes your wifi network implode if you plan on installing a
| large number of them._
|
| Even hundreds of Matter devices using Wi-Fi would
| collectively use an insignificant portion of your Wi-Fi
| network's throughput.
| santialbo wrote:
| Try having more that 40-50 devices connected to your home
| router and you will see devices disconnecting randomly
| because your router can't keep up with them.
| CharlesW wrote:
| I have more than that on my ordinary consumer router and
| have never seen a problem. Worst case, it'd be
| straightforward to dedicate a Wi-Fi router to your smart
| devices in the same way that you have a hub (and possibly
| repeaters) for your Zigbee devices.
| ex3ndr wrote:
| That is a super bad advice: most of the matter stuff simply
| unstable, very few devices. Apple's support is also subpar and
| unstable.
| CharlesW wrote:
| Yeah, I can't relate to that at all. My Matter devices are
| more reliable than what they replaced (mostly switches and
| dimmers so far), and HomeKit support has "just worked".
| Matter's a 16-month-old baby, though, so YMMV.
| ars wrote:
| This is very bad advice. You should do the opposite of that.
| Buy Z-Wave devices and use them. They just work.
|
| Later, your Hub will add Tread/Matter support and you can do
| that too, but right now it's not worth the trouble.
| hiddencost wrote:
| I've been using zigbee for industrial applications.
|
| The security angle is particularly appreciated by a factory that
| wants to control their vents from one button without running tons
| of copper wiring. They're not going to put that on their network.
| apapapa wrote:
| If their only worry is using less copper, I am worried.
| sdflhasjd wrote:
| When I started I had a good mix of all 3 (WiFi, Zigbee & Z-wave).
| 5 years layer, everything's slowly been absorbed into Zigbee.
| WiFi isn't a mesh network, so there's extremities with poor
| reliability. Z-wave just seemed to suffer from poor device
| availability, and everything turned out to be more expensive with
| no real benefit.
|
| Also, one other thing to mention with WiFi and Bluetooth is how
| it's basically a massive red flag, a stamp of "hey, this device
| needs our shit app to use."
|
| It's just a shame there's no Zigbee ESP32 equivalent for all my
| hobby bits.
| shellfishgene wrote:
| There is [1], but it's not open source and 'advanced'
| functions, like battery operation, cost money. Also this [2]
| project is promising, but in the early stages I think. Also I
| guess newer ESP32 support zigbee in principle, there is some
| discussion of adding this to ESPHome.
|
| [1] https://ptvo.info/zigbee-configurable-firmware-features/
| [2] https://github.com/ffenix113/zigbee_home
| sitzkrieg wrote:
| becoming more and more impressed at the number of devices being
| crammed into each home clogging up the already decimated ism
| bands
| mlichvar wrote:
| My current understanding of the wireless technologies wrt to home
| automation:
|
| - wifi is most reliable, secure, easiest to debug, but usable
| only for mains-powered devices due to higher energy consumption
|
| - bluetooth LE has lowest energy consumption, best for unreliable
| broadcasting of data (e.g. temperature sensors), but has shorter
| range
|
| - zigbee is best for battery-powered devices where reliable
| communication is needed and is initiated by the device (e.g.
| switch, window/door sensor)
|
| - zwave is best for battery-powered devices which need to quickly
| receive data (e.g. door lock or directly controller radiator
| valves), but security seems problematic according to some reports
| santialbo wrote:
| Add to wifi that if you plan on having a lot of devices your
| router might commit seppuku.
|
| Zigbee can hold hundreds of devices (as long a you have zb
| routers in your mesh)
| burnerthrow008 wrote:
| Regardless of theory, my experience has been that WiFi
| communications are significantly less reliable than Zigbee or
| BLE, and typically have worse latency to boot.
|
| Unless you have a bunch of WiFi APs around your house,
| practical range with Zigbee is also better than WiFi because
| powered Zigbee nodes (like lightbulbs and switched outlets) act
| as mesh routers.
|
| One additional benefit of Zigbee and Wave is the possibility of
| creating battery-less devices, like the Philips Hue Tap switch,
| which uses a hammer and piezoelectric generator for power.
| anonuser1234 wrote:
| I actually went down the zigbee rabbit hole with my house last
| week. I tried the best selling zigbee motion sensors on amazon,
| however, they only worked within line of sight of the zigbee
| antenna. I then tried the Phillips hue motion sensors. They
| worked flawlessly throughout my home.
| devonkim wrote:
| One thing I found a bit unsettling about some products is how
| manufacturers can say they support a standard when they're really
| using it as a basis for a proprietary lock-in strategy. I didn't
| realize the standards were so loose until I started researching
| some newer devices to support Home Assistant, namely the Aqara
| U100 which seems to require the Aqara hub to be able to support
| standard Zigbee when it's advertised as supporting Zigbee
|
| https://community.home-assistant.io/t/aqara-u100-smart-lock/...
| yurishimo wrote:
| Is this true of Zwave? From what I understood, one of the
| reasons that zwave devices are substantially more expensive, is
| that the licensing and certification requirements are much more
| strict. There also isn't a "first party" zwave hub that I can
| find. The Zwave alliance seems to only deal with the protocol
| and licensing, thus, any hub that claims to support zwave, will
| work with any zwave device.
| organsnyder wrote:
| That's been my experience so far. I have ~20 Z-wave devices
| from a variety of manufacturers. They all work very well with
| Home Assistant, and many of them now support firmware
| updating directly through HA as well.
| gh02t wrote:
| No. Loosely speaking, Zwave pretty strictly defines a list of
| device types (lightbulb, thermometer, etc) and supported
| formats for read/writes to it by device type (turn on/off,
| reports temperature,...). The API to handle those is then
| standardized, and the device manufacturer just fills in the
| code to implement the calls appropriate to the device.
| Devices are more-or-less "self-describing."
|
| Baseline Zigbee is a bit more freeform (it's not solely a
| home automation protocol) and is a transport for whatever
| data format manufacturers want to send, with devices
| implementing their own details on top. Later on there was an
| attempt to standardize the communication format for home
| automation similar to how Zwave works and it was somewhat
| successful, but manufacturers still have a bad habit of
| having deviations and quirks. The standard is also not as
| rigidly enforced like it is with Zwave.
|
| Again this is all simplified and there's more nuance but
| that's generally the breakdown. Practically speaking you'll
| have more consistency with Zwave devices, but nowadays Zigbee
| devices have a lot more variety. Support for (and quality of
| support for) new devices in Zigbee _can_ be a bit more hit-
| or-miss, but it 's usually pretty good nowadays with Zigbee
| having more marketshare/momentum. I use both, I have more
| problems with Zigbee, but I also have more devices for it by
| virtue of their being more choices.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| This seems like an edge case. It's pretty rare to see a product
| advertise a protocol that isn't freely used like this one. It
| even explicitly says in the product description it requires a
| hub. Aqara has always played fast and loose with support of
| various open specs.
|
| Ecobee remote thermometers use Zigbee, but they can't be
| generally paired to non ecobee products, and as such they don't
| advertise Zigbee support.
| yesimahuman wrote:
| My zigbee devices are the best part of my smart home setup (with
| home assistant). They always work, battery life is ridiculous,
| and they're interoperable. Have only had issues with one motion
| detector from a brand that has otherwise been rock solid. If I
| had only known about zigbee before I swore off smart home tech
| (instead of wifi and proprietary hubs) the last time I tried I
| would have had a lot more fun!
| bhaney wrote:
| Apparently I'm one of the rare few people who fell on the WiFi
| side of the WiFi/Zigbee smart home war.
|
| All of my lightbulbs, occupancy sensors, etc just connect
| directly to WiFi, and run custom firmware that I wrote so I know
| exactly what they're doing and how to control them. They make no
| attempt to access the wider Internet, but they're all on a vlan
| without Internet access anyway.
|
| It feels like introducing Zigbee to this would just be an extra
| hub device taking up space, acting as an extra point of failure,
| and making it more complicated to develop against my devices. As
| it stands now I can easily manually control devices by piping
| crap into netcat if I need to for some reason, since they're all
| just normal IP networked devices. I think I would have to jump
| though extra hoops to do similar things with Zigbee.
|
| Is the main aspect driving people to Zigbee just that off the
| shelf consumer smart devices that use WiFi tend to be annoying
| dogshit, and Zigbee keeps manufacturers in line better? I don't
| see any reliability or simplicity benefits to it, just the market
| poisoning WiFi and Zigbee being the only worthwhile alternative.
| karlgkk wrote:
| For zigbee, you could either obtain a zigbee/usb dongle
| (interact over virtual serial port to send zigbee commands -
| tons of libraries exist to provide an api surface), or obtain a
| hub and figure out its api.
|
| Zigbee also has functional mesh features that wifi doesn't. One
| is designed for high bandwidth single point communication while
| the other is designed for low bandwidth long range.
| Tomuus wrote:
| ZigBee is a mesh network, this is very important in many
| situations eg. battery powered or large area
| dzikimarian wrote:
| There's at least a few interesting points for zigbee:
|
| * If you use universal hub like Home Assistant, they are pretty
| interoperable between various manufacturers
|
| * Devices don't have direct connection to internet (again esp.
| with HA), so better privacy, they are faster (no cloud lag) and
| do not depend on internet connection
|
| * Battery life is way better for small devices
|
| * Mesh is nice when you have bigger area to cover
|
| * If you have to use shitty ISP router, it will have issues
| with large number of devices
|
| * Usually easy push-to-pair setup
|
| And there isn't many downsides - one time cost of some kind of
| coordinator and very slightly pricier equipment.
| alwa wrote:
| I'm a latecomer to the home automation game, so I'm speaking
| from theory more than experience. In the environments where I'm
| thinking about building out, the WiFi is... you know, _fine_ ,
| but it's not a rock solid corporate campus pushing reliable
| signal to every crevice of every garage and outbuilding where I
| might be interested in adding sensors. Power, though, is
| plentiful, and Zigbee's auto-meshing capabilities are therefore
| attractive to me.
|
| I also have an impression that Zigbee et al are more friendly
| to extremely low-power, battery-operated sensors participating
| in the network in situations where a WiFi radio might drain
| down quickly.
|
| You do mention occupancy sensors, though--if you have
| experience with battery-powered models that work reliably on
| WiFi, I'd be open to changing my mind.
| bhaney wrote:
| > I also have an impression that Zigbee et al are more
| friendly to extremely low-power, battery-operated sensors
|
| That makes sense. All of my "smart" devices are wired to
| power because I don't want to maintain batteries, and "power
| is plentiful" as you said. But I can see why WiFi would be a
| detriment for battery-powered devices, and why some devices
| would be annoying to hard wire to power (door/window sensors
| come to mind).
|
| > if you have experience with battery-powered models that
| work reliably on WiFi
|
| I don't. Most of my sensor devices are just generic sensor
| components wired into a ESP8266 breakout board, plugged into
| power. Not much that's ready off-the-shelf.
| matthew-wegner wrote:
| How long do your battery-powered devices last?
|
| AFAIK a big benefit of Zigbee is that it's designed to be low-
| power. I have motion sensors that last for 2-3 years on a coin
| battery, depending on location/traffic. Mains-powered devices
| like lightbulbs act as repeaters in a Zigbee network, so
| placement can be anywhere.
| t43562 wrote:
| I have had a rotten time so far trying to get anything to happen
| with my Tradfri lights - I started off assuming that all of this
| could be done from the commandline - no not without difficulty.
|
| How do you pair your computer's zigbee with the lightbulb? Who
| @#$#$ knows. The button - how do you EVER get that to pair or do
| you?
|
| I'm so hacked off with it I cannot go back and try again for a
| while but IMO it all has a very long way before it gets as simple
| even as bluetooth and that was always pretty horrible itself
| (from the commandline at least).
| apapapa wrote:
| So functionality isn't the best part of your smart home?
|
| For me it is a wirelessly-controlled deadbolt
| tw04 wrote:
| +1 for Hubitat - assuming they don't sell out their business
| model is perfect. They sell the base hardware which you'll need
| to upgrade over time as new z-wave/zigbee/other protocols come
| out. Additionally they will sell a subscription for backing up
| the hub configuration to the cloud, and essentially creating a
| reverse proxy to manage their hubs remotely.
|
| The hub can operate completely offline, or if you're technically
| capable of setting up a reverse proxy/vpn/whatever to manage it
| you can do that as well. They provide timely updates, the hub for
| the most part has been rock solid, and the upgrade path between
| generations is pretty painless.
|
| I've got a mix of both zigbee, z-wave, and a handful of wifi
| devices (that were free, I would never ever spend money on a wifi
| smart device if I could avoid it).
|
| As an added bonus if you were a smartthings user, you can migrate
| your automation/drivers/etc with little to no modifications.
| Think about them as smart things 2.0.
|
| www.hubitat.com
|
| Disclaimer: not affiliated, just a fan.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| Zigbee continues to be the only reliable thing in my household. I
| switched to the IKEA Dirigera hub for most of it and it's pretty
| stable. Cannot say that about almost anything else and I tried a
| lot.
| m463 wrote:
| question - what system would you recommend for people in high
| density housing?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-12 23:01 UTC)