LAN Discovery Redux


(John C) #1

Continuing the discussion from @pstuart’s earlier thread Warning: new lan discovery feature in 2.3 (thread closed by ST):

What’s the progress, if any, on improving customer satisfaction by modifying the use of automatic LAN device discovery? The previous discussion thread was closed by @slagle on account of poor behavior and name calling. Let’s keep it civil…

My experience adding a single zwave device to my hub this afternoon reminded me why this feature is such a PITA! Before I was able to add the new device, LAN discovery slowly ground through all my Sonos devices (six of 'em!), snooped around for other LAN devices, and finally found my new zwave device.

Since I was unable to remove the errant LAN devices from the results screen, I was forced to accept all – THEN laboriously find & remove each. Awkward!

Is anything on the roadmap to make this more user friendly? :confused:


(Not Dexter) #2

The claim is that this is user friendly, because the average Joe wants all of the things added and that’s now the default (and only) behavior. EZ, PZ.

But, as we’ve all pointed out, this is a complete slap in the face to the actual proponents of this technology (us), who want to manage our LAN devices ourselves. It’s a hassle, inconvenience, and an utter disregard for order and reason to have it forced on us.

Anything short of letting us manage when and how devices are added is unacceptable.

Really, how hard is it to add a toggle in the settings to allow auto-add, or just a simple yes/no prompt when a device is found?


(John C) #3

My point, exactly. Even checkboxes next to each discovered device, default to ‘accept,’ would be nice. Us “power users” could simply un-check devices we don’t wish to add.

It was pretty clear in the previous linked thread something like this would go a long way toward making this subset of users more satisfied…


(Patrick Stuart [@pstuart]) #4

Don’t hold your breath. It is easy to do, but there is no motivation to do it.


#5

@slagle @tyler

One adobe house. Due to range issues, there are two SmartThings hubs on the same Account, but each set up as a different “location.” Just one Wi-Fi for the house.

There is a Phillips hue bridge. Which location does SmartThings assign it to through superLAN CONNECT, and what happens at the other location?


(Patrick Stuart [@pstuart]) #6

I’ve actually tested this, both hubs on same lan will add anything they find on the lan to each account. Duplicates all over the board. Unless something has changed since I took down my lab for my move to California.


#7

So does that mean a Hue bulb attached to that Hue bridge will be controllable from both hubs? In this case, it’s just one SmartThings account, but two locations.


(Patrick Stuart [@pstuart]) #8

Yeah, don’t know how the 2 hubs one account process works. I use separate accounts per hub.

Since that configuration isn’t officially supported, mileage will vary, but I will assume the lan devices will be duplicated because slc is a location based smartapp in both locations. You could disable it on one location in the ide.


#9

It’s Officially supported as long as each hub is its own location.

https://support.smartthings.com/hc/en-us/articles/203064530-Can-I-use-two-Hubs-in-one-Location-

You can control multiple Hubs from one account, provided each Hub has its own Location.


(Patrick Stuart [@pstuart]) #10

Yeah, sorry supported but does it really work as a location. So many things get broken when you try multiple locations on same local network.

Sounds like my one hub per account still makes sense.

Sad really. And still no user level permissions either.

All it takes is any user on any account on any location on any hub to discover ALL your devices without your permission. Great feature!?