Future proof renovation for IoT

xabi · 16-09-2017 3:49pm #1

Just starting to renovate our house and want to future proof for automation. Should I be running data cables from every room back to a cabinet somewhere, or will wifi cover me for most things.

Initially looking at smart doorbell, remote hearting controls and a few smart plugs and the ability to control some lights remotely.

What should I / would you do now that I have the chance?

Nelbert · 16-09-2017 5:50pm

xabi wrote: »

Just starting to renovate our house and want to future proof for automation. Should I be running data cables from every room back to a cabinet somewhere, or will wifi cover me for most things.

Initially looking at smart doorbell, remote hearting controls and a few smart plugs and the ability to control some lights remotely.

What should I / would you do now that I have the chance?

Cat6 to every room. Every socket if you can. Just gives you so much more flexibility. You can add multiple wifi access points around the house if required with ease then as well as having the strength of wired connection for streaming devices, shared storage etc.

ted1 · 17-09-2017 8:26am

Wifi should cover you , most devices have built in wifi or use RF to talk to a master device that has Wifi

wexfordman2 · 17-09-2017 8:56am

ted1 wrote: »

Wifi should cover you , most devices have built in wifi or use RF to talk to a master device that has Wifi

Sorry, can't agree with that at all. WiFi is fine as a backup, or for lght browsing etc, but your first approach should always be wired...always.

Especially when rewiring a house, or wiring for the first time.

ted1 · 17-09-2017 10:31am

We must agree to differ .

The way I see it:
Amazon echo: WIFI
Google home : WIFI
NEST: Wifi

Etc etc

Anybody I know who has hard wired has yet to use it, general because the wifi works perfect or the connection point is in the wrong location.

wexfordman2 · 17-09-2017 10:39am

ted1 wrote: »

We must agree to differ .

The way I see it:
Amazon echo: WIFI
Google home : WIFI
NEST: Wifi

Etc etc

Anybody I know who has hard wired has yet to use it, general because the wifi works perfect or the connection point is in the wrong location.

Yes, these are low throughput devices, wireless has a place, but wired first always.

The point being, tv, streaming, printing, etc all ways wired as your first option, plan and design for that. Your house must have a wired network as it's backbone, feeding as many devises as possible, and also being the backbone for distributed wireless access points if needed.

I also think a hardwired solution for smart lighting is the first port of call as well, and not to utilise wireless if you have the option of wiring from.day in, and that includes placing cat 5 for control wiring in light switches.

bk · 18-09-2017 3:21pm

I would run at least one cat6 cable to each room, ideally in the ceiling.

The future of wifi is very short range, wideband radio. It won't penetrate walls. You really want multiple wifi access points spread throughout you home, feeding back to the router over cat6.

ted1 wrote:

Anybody I know who has hard wired has yet to use it, general because the wifi works perfect or the connection point is in the wrong location.

Well you have meet one now! My place came pre-wired with cat5e, two drops to each room (one on each side of the room) and I use it extensively.

I do of course use wifi, for phones, laptop and GHome/Alexa. However everything that can be wired is. Mac mini, Network Attached Storage, NowTV, NVidia Shield TV, etc.

Helps to keep the biggest bandwidth hogs (video devices) off the wireless network and leaves more bandwidth available for the purely wireless devices.

Also use cat5e to put wifi access points around the house, helps boost performance of the wifi.

I actually wish it had been cat6 and more drops, it would have allowed me to do HDMI over cat6 and would have been a more elegant solution to my current set up.

xabi · 20-09-2017 1:53pm

Thanks all,

I have decided to run cat6 to each room, i might even go for 2 drops per room. Ill also add a few in the ceilings for WAP's. Think ill go for a 24 port switch to run everything back to, i assume a patch panel at the central location would make sense as needs change it will give me an easy option to switch what the ports are doing in each room.

Anything other than that i should be considering? For smart light switches, would each need a cat6 back to central hub, or is there a better solution?

Automated gates? Should i run cat6 out to gate too? What about security cameras? Cat6 to those too?

jimmycrackcorm · 20-09-2017 2:06pm

ted1 wrote:

Anybody I know who has hard wired has yet to use it, general because the wifi works perfect or the connection point is in the wrong location.

I have to agree. I think the future is wireless and that is only going to improve.

If it was cheap and practical enough, I'd wire to reach room but it would have to be very cheap to justify.

For my I run one cable to my sitting room just to put in another wifi router to enhance the signal at the other side of the house.

swampgas · 20-09-2017 4:57pm

I renovated a big old house a few years back and ran CAT-5e cables to most rooms, as the walls were thick and I wanted to set up three of four WiFi Access Points for coverage. I was very glad I did.

Wireless may be getting better but the more devices use it the more it can slow down, and in an urban area you don't know what impact the neighbours can have as they use their own WiFi, baby monitors, etc. It can't hurt to run in a few cables while it's easy, rather than regret it in a few months or years when it's too late.

Right now I have the following wired with Cat-5e: NAS x 2, X-Box, TV, Eircom TV box, and docking station for work laptop. WiFi has everything else and there are too many to list

bk · 21-09-2017 10:26am

xabi wrote: »

Anything other than that i should be considering? For smart light switches, would each need a cat6 back to central hub, or is there a better solution?

You can also use wireless zigbee/zwave for smart switches. I think wireless works fine for smart switches given the very low mount of data being sent, but others might disagree.

Definitely a good call on running cat6 and some drops for WAPs and a 24 port switch and patch panels good ideas too. Though you could always do those in future if money is tight. The most important thing is to ensure you have the cables in the walls up front.

xabi wrote: »

Automated gates? Should i run cat6 out to gate too? What about security cameras? Cat6 to those too?

Yes to all. The beauty of cat6 is that it is very versatile. It can carry power and data to security cameras, etc.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I have to agree. I think the future is wireless and that is only going to improve.

Just to stress that while the future is wifi. The real future is actually multiple wireless access points (WAPs) wired back via cat6 to a central location.

This gives you by far the best quality of wifi signal. Good strong, high bandwidth signal throughout your home, that can handle lots of devices connected to it at the same time, while minimising interference from neighbours (particularly important in an urban setting).

This is how high quality enterprise level wifi is done in offices, etc.

BTW the next standard for wifi is 802.11ad, which operates at 60GHz and can potentially deliver 4Gbps!

The downside with it though, is that it is extremely short range. As in just a meter or two and definitely won't penetrate walls, so you would definitely need a WAP in each room where you wanted this speed, feed back via cat6.

wexfordman2 · 22-09-2017 9:26am

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I have to agree. I think the future is wireless and that is only going to improve.

If it was cheap and practical enough, I'd wire to reach room but it would have to be very cheap to justify.

For my I run one cable to my sitting room just to put in another wifi router to enhance the signal at the other side of the house.

Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more. First off, in the building or renovation stage, running cat cable is dirt cheap, never mind comparing it the lifetime of your building over time against the cost of installing and running multiple wireless access points etc.

A passive system is always better than an active one, the less active powered devices, the more reliable and trouble free your system will be, and without doubt, the cheaper it will be also.

Cat cabling is dirt cheap, multiple wifi points, continuously upgrading devices to meet later standards, managing and configuring them, powering them etc is not cheap in cost or time.

Plan for wifi everywhere, but only for handheld devices etc, not as the backbone for your tv video, gaming etc.

paulbok · 29-09-2017 12:06pm

Agree entirely with above.
Renovated my house 2 years ago and didn't put in any cat cables or enough empty socket boxes for future tech. Really regret it not and have to use 2 WiFi extenders due to the walls in the house and even that doesn't give 100% coverage.
Key to the OP's post was future proofing, so the more cables and/or empty ducts you can put in at this stage the better.
"Better looking at it than looking for it"

BoardsMember · 02-10-2017 2:30pm

When you have the CAT based wired network, with multiple wireless access points, presumably you are left with the situation where devices accessing a wired point might "stick" to a weaker WAP, rather than auto connect to the strongest available?

swampgas · 02-10-2017 2:43pm

BoardsMember wrote: »

When you have the CAT based wired network, with multiple wireless access points, presumably you are left with the situation where devices accessing a wired point might "stick" to a weaker WAP, rather than auto connect to the strongest available?

That was the case for me in my previous home. Three WAPs wired back to a central switch. Moving around the house sometimes required me to turn WiFi off and on again to get a strong signal.

There are ways around it but require a Wireless Controller, something usually only seen in enterprise networks (AFAIK).

lordgoat · 02-10-2017 6:08pm

BoardsMember wrote: »

When you have the CAT based wired network, with multiple wireless access points, presumably you are left with the situation where devices accessing a wired point might "stick" to a weaker WAP, rather than auto connect to the strongest available?

Unless you are on a system like Ubiquiti.

Stoner · 03-10-2017 6:50am

Google WiFi has a mesh network.

It has an excellent app for things like SONOFF too as you get a nice list of connected devices that you can rename from the app

Eire Go Brach · 03-10-2017 7:39am

Good debate on cable v wireless. Mesh networks are brilliant these days. I would still wire though. Sure why not.
Hate the idea of having google mesh. I’d feel so violated being google collecting your data. I’d use another brand. They are not the best on market.
Get a POE switch. Could come in handy for cameras etc

Stoner · 03-10-2017 9:26am

Eire Go Brach wrote:

Good debate on cable v wireless. Mesh networks are brilliant these days. I would still wire though. Sure why not. Hate the idea of having google mesh. Iâ€™d feel so violated being google collecting your data. Iâ€™d use another brand. They are not the best on market. Get a POE switch. Could come in handy for cameras etc

Google WiFi is handy

I've my iot kit on it but I've a wired network and a number of switches around the place too .

My PCs are not on the Google WiFi network.

RonanC · 03-10-2017 10:41am

I'm building a house at the moment and have wired for CAT6 throughout. I already have an Airport Time Capsule and two Airport Expresses that I was going to use in the new home for wifi coverage, but was wondering if a mesh network like Google Wifi would offer any additional benefits?

bk · 03-10-2017 10:52am

Doesn't Google Wifi also support ethernet backhaul?

Better to use that then the mesh network. Google Wifi's mesh network setup and performance is not great, just ok. Basically it is using the same wifi radio for backhaul to the other Google wifi units as it is for your device connecting to it. That means overhaul your cutting the available bandwidth in half. This is considered the worst form of mesh network. It works ok in terms of keeping devices connected, but you are definitely getting reduced throughput. Now that might not matter if your broadband is slow anyway or just want to stream Netflix, but if you are doing big uploads/downloads or copying files between devices, it isn't ideal.

The next step up from Google Wifi is systems like Netgear Orbi. They have an extra separate wifi radio built in, which is used exclusively for the mesh network, so it isn't sharing bandwidth with the connected devices and thus bandwidth is much higher. Much better performance then Google Wifi.

But even these systems are limited by the bandwidth of the backhaul wifi channel, which is far less bandwidth then ethernet and also their is always the issue of wireless interference. So if you can it is always best to use ethernet for backhaul.

Since we are talking about people future proofing new builds/renovations, it is important to remember that someone might still be in their home 30 years from now. Google Wifi using wireless backhaul might be ok for today, but it also might not be nowhere enough 30 years from now.

03-10-2017 10:55am

those wifi powerline plugs work pretty well as a fairly inexpensive solution
they are now rated at the gigabit level even though you won't actually get that speed.
still something like 200mbps actual is more than enough

bk · 03-10-2017 10:58am

RonanC wrote: »

I'm building a house at the moment and have wired for CAT6 throughout. I already have an Airport Time Capsule and two Airport Expresses that I was going to use in the new home for wifi coverage, but was wondering if a mesh network like Google Wifi would offer any additional benefits?

The term "mesh network" is pure marketing, it isn't really a mesh network (not in the true networking sense) and it certainly isn't better then using the cat6 for backhaul.

If you were to use Google Wifi in the mesh setup, it would actually be far inferior to your current setup, as it would have much reduced bandwidth.

You can however use Google Wifi with cat6 as the backhaul rather then wireless as the backhaul and in this setup it would be roughly equivalent to your current setup in terms of performance.

The only real benefit of Google Wifi might be the ease of setup and use. Easy admin of kids, etc. But it really doesn't offer much in terms of performance.

TheBigGreen · 15-01-2019 6:03pm

Sorry to bring up an old thread but I think it's the best place for it?!

I'm meeting up with the electrician to walk through the house for first fixing on Friday.

I would like to pick your brains on future proofing.

So,

- Neutral wire to every light switch.
- Deep back box for every light switch.
- Mini server with future capacity in central location.
- Ubiquiti Unifi AC Pro AP (2 upstairs and 2 down stairs).
- 2 Cat6 cables to the APs.
- 4 coax cables from the attic to your central location (for satellite/aerial).
- 2 coax connections to most rooms and a Cat6 connection at low level.
- 1 coax from where Virgin cable may enter your house to the central location.
- Cat6 cable to the doorbell.
- Will probably install Netatmo cam-outdoor so won't need cat6 out there?
- Maybe one HDMI cable from the central location to the main TV.
- Not going with speakers in the house but maybe in the back garden?
- 2 Cat6 out to the future garage?

Will look at smart switches once living in the house a few months and see what we need.

Is there more items that I have missed or would be handy?

Thanks

paulbok · 15-01-2019 9:27pm

Cat6 direct to your tvs. You might want to use the wake on lan functions available that way for automations.
Bring cat6 to that camera point. You might not always have the Netatmo.

Lots and lots of power sockets, get the face plates with USB power slots.

andydurnin · 16-01-2019 12:37am

I'm moving into my house and want to future proof it. What would I need and dose anyone know anyone that can install this but won't cost an arm and a leg.

paulbok · 16-01-2019 8:55am

The majority of what's listed here can be installed by an electrician. All the cat6 can be run to where it is needed but doesn't need to be connected up until needed down the line.
The cost will depend on if you have to rewire the house or not. If you do, it won't be that much of additional cost. If you don't then it will cost a bit on labour I'm afraid.

Phibsboro · 22-01-2019 3:30pm

I was just about to start a similar thread but saw this one, some interesting advice already.

Re cabling, I can see both points of view. I did my current house (tiny terraced) up around 10 years ago and put cat5 and coax into every room. In the end I only used the ones I used from day 1, nothing I intended as future proofing got used. The key thing for me was to have a switch/router at the TV as that is where most of wired connections are (popcorn, TV, Android TV box, an old Apple Mini ).

Having said that, I can see BK's point about running cat6 (and poe) to support future high frequency/short range WiFi. But then, as BK says, you should probably be putting in your ceiling rather than your wall. Overall though, given that ad actually predates ac and still isn't widely available domestically, I'm not sure anything non-wall penetrating is going to take off domestically. I think we'll see ongoing development of the lower frequency ranges, like the upcoming ax that will go to 11Gbs. At that speed any talk of backhaul goes out the window, it is faster than the cat6 maximum.

I think for my place I will run cables purely for three reasons - one to cover any possible distance issues (so one to a landing ceiling and one to a garden room I hope to do), secondly to cover privacy issues (so one to my office for my main work computer) and finally to cover immediate wired needs at the TV. For coax, I'll put legacy ones in for Sat and Terrestrial in the living room but the future is definitely IP so no coax anywhere else.

Finally, another question for you all - I had this epiphany when I was reading about light switches ideally needing a dropped neutral, deep back box etc. My gut feel is that the future of lighting is virtually switchless. I run a few Hue sensors here at home and rarely if ever hit a light switch. More to the point, any switches in the future will probably be wireless and unpowered, ala the new range of Friends of Hue passive switches. In that context, I am soooo tempted to future proof by running no wires at all for light switches. Every light is directly connected back to a panel of on-off switches near the main switchboard. This allows for the requisite power on/off needed to pair most wifi bulbs. All you have in the rooms are sensors and passive wall switches for the occasional manual activation.

Any thoughts on that idea?

paulbok · 22-01-2019 3:58pm

Phibsboro wrote: »

I was just about to start a similar thread but saw this one, some interesting advice already.

Re cabling, I can see both points of view. I did my current house (tiny terraced) up around 10 years ago and put cat5 and coax into every room. In the end I only used the ones I used from day 1, nothing I intended as future proofing got used. The key thing for me was to have a switch/router at the TV as that is where most of wired connections are (popcorn, TV, Android TV box, an old Apple Mini ).

Having said that, I can see BK's point about running cat6 (and poe) to support future high frequency/short range WiFi. But then, as BK says, you should probably be putting in your ceiling rather than your wall. Overall though, given that ad actually predates ac and still isn't widely available domestically, I'm not sure anything non-wall penetrating is going to take off domestically. I think we'll see ongoing development of the lower frequency ranges, like the upcoming ax that will go to 11Gbs. At that speed any talk of backhaul goes out the window, it is faster than the cat6 maximum.

I think for my place I will run cables purely for three reasons - one to cover any possible distance issues (so one to a landing ceiling and one to a garden room I hope to do), secondly to cover privacy issues (so one to my office for my main work computer) and finally to cover immediate wired needs at the TV. For coax, I'll put legacy ones in for Sat and Terrestrial in the living room but the future is definitely IP so no coax anywhere else.

Finally, another question for you all - I had this epiphany when I was reading about light switches ideally needing a dropped neutral, deep back box etc. My gut feel is that the future of lighting is virtually switchless. I run a few Hue sensors here at home and rarely if ever hit a light switch. More to the point, any switches in the future will probably be wireless and unpowered, ala the new range of Friends of Hue passive switches. In that context, I am soooo tempted to future proof by running no wires at all for light switches. Every light is directly connected back to a panel of on-off switches near the main switchboard. This allows for the requisite power on/off needed to pair most wifi bulbs. All you have in the rooms are sensors and passive wall switches for the occasional manual activation.

Any thoughts on that idea?

I'm sorry I didn't do that with the switches with the house when I renovated, but I didn't start down the automation path until too late.

TheBigGreen · 22-01-2019 5:37pm

I'll be using 2 Ubiquiti APs for the new build and I noticed that they have PoE outdoor camera so I'm thinking maybe am I better off installing a UniFi ecosystem? UniFi Security Gateway, is it over kill? I'd like to have a reliable system and UniFi is getting great reviews.

bk · 22-01-2019 5:47pm

Phibsboro wrote: »

Finally, another question for you all - I had this epiphany when I was reading about light switches ideally needing a dropped neutral, deep back box etc. My gut feel is that the future of lighting is virtually switchless. I run a few Hue sensors here at home and rarely if ever hit a light switch. More to the point, any switches in the future will probably be wireless and unpowered, ala the new range of Friends of Hue passive switches. In that context, I am soooo tempted to future proof by running no wires at all for light switches. Every light is directly connected back to a panel of on-off switches near the main switchboard. This allows for the requisite power on/off needed to pair most wifi bulbs. All you have in the rooms are sensors and passive wall switches for the occasional manual activation.

Any thoughts on that idea?

Well the way house wiring normally works it is:

Fusebox -> Light switch -> light

Even if you take the switch out, you'd still have the cables to the light fixture in much the same place, passing where the light switch would otherwise be.

Personally if I was going this way, I'd still put the hole in the wall where a light switch would go and just cover it with a blank face plate. That gives you the flexibility to put in a light switch at a later date or perhaps even some future use like power a touchscreen smart home control panel, etc.

Having said that, I don't think I'd be without the light switch. I don't think Hue or any smart light switch are reliable enough. I'd say I end up having to use the physical switch at least once a week to toggle the light on because the motion sensor didn't work for some reason. Usually switching off and on again fixes it. But I think it would be a pain to have to go to the fuse box each time to toggle the switch to fix it.

Future proof renovation for IoT

Comments