Just a wider thought on this. If you consider the massive scale of the number of devices that are on the eWelink network, for each device to be sending a status update at 150 second intervals is creating a lot of data to process. However, they do want to keep track of devices going offline.
Personally I think it would be much better to use a TCP keepalive to keep track of the online/offline status. This is processed at the TCP layer and each keepalive would take minimal CPU cycles. If necessary, they could do a full status update at a much lower frequency - say every 30 minutes.
It would also enable them to have a more frequent keepalive, say at 60 seconds, and help avoid these table expiry issues.
1 Like
This level of analysis of the problem is beyond me, I do not have the knowledge needed to understand it. I think that the Itead team should cooperate with you and if your conclusions are right, you could make good money from it, and they would gain much more by improving the quality of their services…
1 Like
That sounds like an interesting idea, can you make this script public?
I have 63 sonoff devices they randomly go off and back online, I can tell you I try it with asus dlink Xiaomi and openwrt router combinations and different dns lease times as well
I even tunneled it to a vpn provider.
It’s an ewelink f up bug, and not related to your NAT network.
Plan x would be Tasmota, but with so much devices it takes weeks to reconfigure everything
Please ewelink developer fix this issue!
I came across this post because I was searching for some information on my experience.
I have a number of Sonoff RF bridges running off a 4G/5G modem in bridge mode, feeding a GL.inet router. (As an aside, this range of routers is excellent, albeit they do not have every feature that one might expect from a very expensive professional router). I had installed Cyberghost VPN on the router. When I logged into the router remotely, I saw that some of the RF bridges were shown as online and other offline. These varied over the minutes, with individual RF bridges apparently dropping in and out. Yet, they were all shown as online on my eWeLink app and all had solid blue LEDs (as seen previously). That obviously concerned me, as I could not be sure taht they were acting reliably.
Fortunately, the router offered two facilities. First, a guest network, which I had used for only the RF bridges, to provide some security isolation. Second, it has a VPN Policy section, which meant that I could easily switch off the VPN for just the guest network. When I did that, all of the RF bridges were immediately shown as online and remained so.
I therefore wonder if the problems that some users are experiencing are due to the use of VPN.
Yes, indeed they are.
Generally, IoT devices, especially Matter devices, tend to be stable in simple and flat network conditions (VLAN, Double NAT, VPN could cause unexpected results).
I think this brand has OpenWRT? You can twist around the settings and VPN rules and see which works better.
Yes, it has OpenWRT. It all seems to work well with the basic configuration. It has a proprietary DDNS system, but I would like to be able to add another DDNS system and I am struggling to how that would work.
You can ask about this on OpenWRT communities; there would be more users experienced with the network question.