the 212 is having the same problem as the 223, so will it be fixed the same way in this update?
Hi there, in theory, yes. It should work the same way.
Make sure you exclude your 212 and add it with the 223 wizard.
@Sorin, thanks for the info, has anybody tested it with the new update and confirmed that is working properly please
“It would appear that the fix to Fibaro 223 as well as 212 has been pushed back a bit due to some reliability issues”
I got this reply from the support, it is reaaaally a long discussion which lasted two years, for me as a long time customer it is really a deal breaker. And with all the justifications provided from vera for me it is a simple math, if all other gateways can support it in secure mode, then it is Vera’s choice not to support it.
Two questions please:
1- is it working fully/normally when added in non-secure mode?
2- What is the down side of adding it in a non secure mode?
can you update us please, I got another reply from the support that there is no way to add the 223 or 212 in a Non-Secure way??!! it has been several days and nobody is addressing this, is there a way to add the 223 and 212 in a Non-Secure way to workaround the delay or Not?
It’s a little bit of the confusion on our agent’s side. I’m sorry for that, he should have already updated you.
We made it pretty clear in the release notes that FGS-223 has been fixed by adding the ability to include them un-secure using the provided wizard within 7.29 beta. And many have already confirmed in the main 7.29 beta thread that the FGS’s are working great with 7.29 beta.
Have you tried excluding your FGS’s and re-including them with the FGS-223 wizard on 7.29 beta?
Yesterday i reset my Vera to factory settings after updating to 7.29 Beta and tried adding my 212 using the 223 wizard. when I included the 212, it gave me a message that it is different than what i am trying to add but went through anyway. it worked well in terms of On/Off speed, however, after a minute or two, it started giving me the message (updating secure classes) or something like that, and started lagging when trying to operate it. If it is added in a non-secure way, why is it retrieving secure info, or that is something different?
is the 212 wizard fixed now too or i still have to add the 212 using the 223 wizard please?
Hi there, I can’t say why fgs 212 is acting like that. I’d continue this with our Customer Care team, so they can verify this behavior and report for fixing in an upcoming build if there is an issue.
So should i include the 212 using the 223 wizard or the 212 wizard is modified to add the device in a non-secure way too?
As far as I know, the 212 wizard has not been touched. The modifications are only to the 223 wizard.
That is the latest update from the support:
“For now, from Vera’s side, there is no way to add the FGS 212 unsecure unless the device has two separate processes for each type, secure or unsecure. Also, adding the device as a different one might not improve communication and the device might still work slowly, we cannot actually guarantee for this.”
This is really frustrating, If the 223 is supported why not the 212? Why Vera is taking it so lightly?
I have a project now where i need to install around 40 fibaro 212 (cause there is no 3 lines setup, and no other 2 lines switch can take up to 250 watts) and i don’t know what to do. I want to order the vera secure but based on all this i cant? It is simply cant work!
Any solution please, anything…
There is a little bit of misunderstanding and lack of investigations on all sides here.
Besides your affirmation, I can’t really find any other reports of FGS-212 having the same issues as FGS-223 when paired normally(secure mode) with Vera.
First of all, we can’t find anywhere any information as this FGS-212 would even use CC SECURE, to begin with. Which means FGS-212 cannot be affected by this issue. If you’re having any type of issue with this device, it must be of a different nature.
We have one sample with which we tested with regular secure inclusion and it worked like a charm. This doesn’t mean we can give you any guarantees because we didn’t have this device gone through any extensive testing and mark it as “Works With Vera”.
Please include FGS-212 with the regular wizard (not the FGS-223 one).
Few months ago i faced a problem with the 212, the problem was that if i include them in a scene it will take very long time to execute and it will delay all actions after them. I contacted the support and they said it is a known problem, i then posted in the forum and some one redirected me to this post saying it might be the same problem since the 223 is having the same issue. And since then (many months now) i was checking and posting in this thread about the issue, and all the replies where promising that it should be fixed with the 223 fix.
Please help me on how shall i proceed… It is very critical for me as the project i am working on is waiting for me to confirm which gateway/dimmer i should use
I think it’s a little bit of confusion.
Let’s focus on this device and not associate it with FGS-223 issues. Everyone associated it with FGS-223 and assumed that it’s the same issue.
Also, you are now also mentioning a Dimmer, which is yet another device. It’s FGD-212.
Please pair your FGS-212 or FGD-212 as usual(not the FGS-223 wizard), and let the team know what issues will you observe with which device (FGS or FGD)and let them investigate.
PS: We’ve just tested FGS-212 and we didn’t find any issues with it.
Appreciate your fast response, i am talking about FGD 212, i don’t think there is any device named FGS 212, there is fgs 213 …
I already added it, will try to test it with a scene, is there a way to see if it is lagging in the loggs?