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?








73 people like this idea

Visit our Guide Domoticz Tasmota: Control Sonoff without Internet. It covers all expects of local controlling a Sonoff devices including video demonstrations. 

@prem raj There is no reason for multiple channels not to be available. Just read the description of the firmware for that item. As there are multiple options of firmware just be selective. Yes, you can flash the bridge. I was going to myself, but mine broke and Sonoff are being typically useless at replacing it. No reason for a device to lose RF sensing ability; just read the firmware description before uploading it. In-fact someone even added a second temperature sensor to a Th etc. The takeaway point is read the description of the firmware before uploading it and check it is for the correct device. @waqas I don’t think it is the software aspect that people will find off-putting. It is opening the devices, probably voiding the warranty, soldering the pins onto the PCB, connecting the USB serial device and then flashing. Given the extreme flakiness of the Sonoff/ewelink/Itead servers they need to make it easy to upload third party firmware OTA.

2 people like this
Is the lan feature "operation notification from hardware...." in settings????

@EB - thank you!

Nova atualização eWeLinK! com opção de Enable Lan! Ja esta disponivel.

Login or Signup to post a comment