I am trying to setup my new Remote2 using a wired connection, WiFi is not an option.
But whenever I startup my dock with the LAN cable connected, the remote cannot see or find the dock. It seems as if Bluetooth is disabled on the dock somehow.
The dock has an IP address and I am able to connect to that IP address and see some information.
When starting the dock with the LAN cable unplugged, the remote can see and find the dock (Bluetooth?!) but then I am forced to setup a WiFi connection, no matter if I plug in a cable or not after powering up the dock.
In that case I am also able to connect to the dock’s IP address when the cable is plugged in but the cable connection cannot be used to setup a connection.
Did anyone else experience such issues? And, if so, how did you resolve that?
Thanks in advance
Today I could verify that there’s no active Bluetooth connection on the dock when there’s a network cable connected during boot.
On the other hand the LAN connection is being ignored after booting the dock without cable but active Bluetooth connection.
Does anybody know whether this is and expected and desired behavior “by design”? Or did I just receive a faulty unit?
Unfortunately, I did not receive any feedback from the support team, yet.
I don’t think this is an intended use case. How are you going to configure your Remote Two if it is not on the Wi-Fi?
You can’t access the Web Configurator via Bluetooth because it runs locally on the Remote and you need the Remote’s IP address to access it.
In my opinion, the dock (currently) only has the function of a charging cradle and a (weak) IR blaster.
What a bummer. That’s what I feared
What ist the dock’s LAN port for, then?
Of, course you cannot access the remote via Bluetooth but I thought, you connect to the dock via LAN and the dock communicates with the remote via Bluetooth and vice versa.
Is the dock’s IP address different from the remote’s IP?
That’s a good question.
Yes, the dock has its own IP address.
From the Unfolded Circle page:
The Smart Charging Dock is an extension of the remote. No range anxiety, they talk to each other via your wireless network.
Send IR commands to its many outputs and learn your old remotes’ codes with the built-in IR receiver.
Top. Side. Extender Port One. Extender Port Two. Route IR signals to the output you want or all of them together.
The dock connects to your wireless network and ready to take commands. Not just from the remote.
It charges the remote and notifies you via the built-in LED, when the remote’s battery is running low.
Thank you for raising this topic. I understand the nuances and the confusion surrounding it. Presently, the Remote2 dock operates using either LAN or WiFi. The inclusion of the LAN port on the dock primarily serves to offer a more stable connection. This proves especially advantageous when the dock is placed in environments like a dedicated server room, which might have weaker or less consistent WiFi signals.
Currently, when the wired LAN port is utilized, the WiFi functionality in the dock is deactivated; this is by design at this stage of development. However, we are open to making modifications in future iterations based on user feedback and needs.
Addressing Razorblade’s questions: Indeed, the dock and the remote possess separate IP addresses. The primary mode of communication between the remote and the dock is through WiFi. Thus, when the dock joins the network, it’s assigned its unique IP address.
Echoing z-master’s observation: At present, the dock’s main roles are to serve as a charging platform and an IR blaster. Nevertheless, enabling the dock to support both WiFi and LAN concurrently is a potential improvement we’re considering for future versions.
Thank you both for suggestions and information. I now have a setup with two IP addreses.
I couldn’t find this information anywhere documented.
Of course, it makes sense that Wi-Fi is being disabled when the dock ist connected to a wired LAN connection.
Maybe it makes sense to setup Remote<->Dock communication via P2P Bluetooth (Low Energy) maybe this might improve energy consumption and wake-up times of the remote<->dock connection. This also eliminates any infrastructure dependency (network failure, turning off WiFi at night…)
I wonder if your questions/issue was answered? If the dock is connected to the LAN and the remote via Wifi but both on the same network, then set-up should work. I have not received my remote yet, but would like to use that combination too, so wonder if this will work.
Furthurmore I also wonder why the remote is not using Bluetooth for communication with the dock, as indeed for wake-up times and power usage that would be far superior to using Wifi.
Yes, my issue was answered and I could resolve it. I mistakenly assumed that one could connect via Bluetooth. But it seems as if all radio protocols are being disabled on the dock, when you connect it to the LAN jack - this makes sense, at least for Wifi.
But as soon as you provide two IP addresses to the devices everything works as designed.
The two addresses do not have to be in the same subnet but this makes life a bit easier