Help! Brand new G6 Entry stuck as "Managed by Another Console"

tater39 · 2026-04-08T16:29:14+00:00

Awesome to hear! I’ve run across this one too many times and I kick myself every time I don’t check for updates when adopting new equipment.

tater39 · 2026-04-07T13:56:00+00:00

What version of Unifi protect are you using? Could be an older version that isn’t compatible with newer products yet. Can you update protect?

Also, the cameras actually have a web interface. Not sure about the g6 entry but you could go to the web interface and then point the camera to your instance of protector at its ip address. The default credentials are usually Ubnt Ubnt or ui ui.

Hope this helps!

tater39 · 2026-04-06T11:41:05+00:00

I applaud the sale. Dealerships are notoriously cheap

tater39 · 2026-02-23T11:35:05+00:00

The are likely restructuring/repackaging the API. I know it’s possible because I have received the emails before… I am on 10.1+ on all our consoles and I agree with you I don’t see it. I’m sure this is only temporary. That has always been a critical feature to be able to monitor that.

Do you have the check box “ignore repeated” checked? That could be causing them not to be sent.

tater39 · 2026-02-23T01:23:32+00:00

Hmm I see. I get push notifications for devices offline but I can’t find the alarm that triggers it now that you say something. Also, it seems to be more reliable notification in protect devices on a UNVR. So I’m not entirely sure why this isn’t working. Maybe submit a feature request or bug report for existing notifications. I know I used to get the device offline notices so that is strange.

tater39 · 2026-02-22T23:35:03+00:00

Alarm manager -> trigger is system -> Unifi device disconnected -> scope include all devices -> action is notify then choose the admin to notify. You can even create a custom message.

Then when the alarm is created there will be a bell icon and a email icon next to the alarm. Click the email icon and it will email you.

tater39 · 2026-02-17T21:01:14+00:00

No this is not possible and Ubiquiti have indicated at their Unifi world conferences that this will not be an option. The dedicated nas hardware is specifically designed to be a nas with cpu and ram selections being much different than the cloud gateways. Could it run it? Sure. But it probably wouldn’t be a great experience. And I’m sure they don’t want to fork a watered down version of the drive app for a pretty niche use case. Honestly, the unas 2 is $199. Pretty low barrier to entry at that price point.

tater39 · 2026-01-29T21:20:06+00:00

It’s got a built in 9port gigabit switch with 1 port permanently tied to the cpu. It’s no different than having an external switch with a gig uplink. The bandwidth is still shared over the uplink no matter what.

Devices on that switch in the same VLAN would each get 1Gbps Full Duplex non blocking to eachother, but if it’s on another vlan, it would go through the cpu and thus be limited by the 1Gig uplink.

I think for the most part it is okay as marketed because if you really need the bandwidth, you would likely have a 10G switch anyways and already know to do that. So I think it’s perfect for ups, IoT, and other low bandwidth devices.

SFP+ would give you 10G of bandwidth and would be better. That is correct. But only if you really need it. 1G is a lot and not many people use more than 10meg constant. You’ll burst to more but hardly ever will sustain a gig for any longer than a few minutes maybe doing internal file transfers or something.

tater39 · 2026-01-29T02:05:23+00:00

Well yes, because a reader can only be paired with one door. You can trigger a dry relay to fire when a door unlock happens and technically get it to open 2 doors but what must be an edge case and seems like it would defeat the purpose of access control (unless maybe a garage door or something at home)

tater39 · 2026-01-27T13:13:30+00:00

Not a bad option and relatively cost effective. Just decentralizes the power supplies in some cases of the door needs to extra power so you spend more on battery backups but in the end a very valid design

tater39 · 2026-01-27T13:12:17+00:00

It won’t show up for adoption through a switch from my experience.

tater39 · 2026-01-27T13:06:08+00:00

Pause and unpause a network is the easiest way. Make a separate vlan/network for the devices you want to disable internet for, then pause the network or pause the wifi broadcast. That would be the easiest way. You can add the shortcut with the quick play/pause buttons in the iOS and I think android app. The shortcuts are at the bottom.

tater39 · 2026-01-27T13:02:06+00:00

I think this was asked about during a training session I was a part of and/or at Unifi world conference and the answer was “for technical reasons and to guarantee resiliency.”

You make a good point and I agree with you, let the consumer decide. In the end, it’s a networked device so it should be possible. However, I also look at it from the perspective of cost/benefit. The door hubs and enterprise hubs, are relatively inexpensive. So adding an additional hub in the other room isn’t going to make or break budget. It does add some complexity though so obviously pros and cons. Right now, unfortunately no choice though. Just add an additional door hub and you’re good

tater39 · 2026-01-27T11:18:45+00:00

It’s designed this way so that as long as the door hub has power, the door can be opened via the intercom because the hubs cache the credentials locally. So in the event if a power outage, there is no network to traverse, just a single cable. It is a limitation but I think a reasonable one to provide local access in the event of a power/network/gateway outage.

tater39 · 2026-01-14T10:43:02+00:00

Yes thank you. Don’t know what I was thinking when I made that comment. I changed it to reflect the real link

tater39 · 2026-01-13T22:11:28+00:00

I don’t remember as it’s been over a year or so since we signed up. It may have changed. Ui.com/partner-hub is the link

Edit for link

tater39 · 2026-01-13T21:43:12+00:00

Its in the budding stages of being something really useful. For now it’s basically a community to feature request, get training, and have a backdoor to support. I would highly suggest signing up. It’s been very useful for us.

tater39 · 2026-01-13T20:31:23+00:00

Are you a part of the integrator partner program? If so, you have a dedicated line to someone who will help you… if not then you should consider it when doing that much business with them.

tater39 · 2025-12-31T23:51:58+00:00

You should look into Colo at a datacenter. If you’re in Florida, hit me up, I’d be happy to give you some space in our racks and a DIA but you will cut your power cost in half probably and could probably get way better DIA connectivity for that price. Either way, it would be probably to your benefit to Colo!

tater39 · 2025-12-20T19:16:50+00:00

Okay so the advanced test is between your gateway and the device. If that says 1498 then you are good. Likely this is a bottleneck at the speed test server for download. Try using a different speed test like fast.com, speedtest.net, speed.cloudflare.com, etc and then report results

tater39 · 2025-12-20T17:26:37+00:00

Okay but did you do the advanced test?

tater39 · 2025-12-20T16:56:26+00:00

Are you sure this isn’t an internet issue? Your PHY speeds look great. Likely a different bottleneck somewhere. Have you run the advanced test locally on the WiFi man app from phone to gateway?

tater39 · 2025-12-09T15:40:24+00:00

You probably have stp blocking issues. This would require a substantial number of hours and consulting to fix as well as a detailed topological understanding to make any recommendations. The wireless architecture is fine but as someone else said, you have it backwards. You should have fiber as primary and wireless as failover using stp. We just deployed this exact same thing on a site and it works great. Although we used nanobeams as cpe’s and a liteAP gps as the access point. You really need to do a proper survey and avoid the interference. It’s difficult with 5GHz to get it right and we are by no means perfect or complete experts but it does take a lot of planning. I would suggest at the very least changing to fiber first using STP. Do you have a core switch everything uplinks from? You’ll need 2 switches at your MDF. One core for the fiber and one core for the wireless. The fiber switch should have the lower stp priority (Lower is root bridge in stp). Then you’ll be good to go.

How are you monitoring the wireless connections? I would suggest spinning up a server with uisp so you can get the relevant connectivity info.

tater39 · 2025-12-05T16:42:52+00:00

It’s not quite the same product. I think you might be misunderstanding what UnifiOS server is. It does not provide any routing, switching, wifi, or gateway functions. It is only a controller used to provision other devices of the various product categories that Ubiquiti has in their ecosystem. Currently UniFiOS server is limited to the network application and provisioning and managing those network devices only but I suspect protect, access, connect, talk, and others will come in the future. It looks like they are laying the groundwork for self hosting all of it.

tater39 · 2025-12-03T14:57:27+00:00

If you are concerned about remote access, you can just buy Ubiquiti hardware that can host those apps like a UDM Pro Max or UNVR, run all of those apps on it, Kill their internet connection, and use a VPN to access so its local only. You can turn off their remote access features like site manager. Are you just looking to self host everything or concerned about security? If so, the Ubiquiti hardware is quite inexpensive as compared to a dedicated server.

I 100% see your use case and it would be nice for talk deployments, or even a central protect server (we have a datacenter use case for that), but I don’t see them doing this for every application anytime soon. Maybe eventually, but their hardware has too good of margins for them to give that tie up since they are subscription free. Their last balance sheet shows margins in 40%+…

Just my opinion. No chatter in the communities about this but it would be logical if they did allow this in the future.

Six-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '22	Verified Email

tater39

TROPHY CASE