So maybe I’m just not the best at programming, but I can’t figure out this problem. I put a BLE widget into my app and a webhook widget with a button to control the webhook. While a device is not connected pressing the button always activates the webhook properly. While my BLE device is connected the webhook never triggers. I am using a RedBear Duo. Thanks!
share your code
``` cpp
CODE
```
I used the given RedBear Duo BLE example code but all I changed was the rgb led code. I just removed it. All I added was BLYNK_READ(V5){
Blynk.virtualWrite(V5, val);
}
That was just to get sensor data from the hardware
That’s a loop… which is a problem
Paste all your code.
Thanks for pointing that out. I didn’t think of that. I decided to go back to the very original example code and change absolutely nothing. When connected to my phone I can change the color of the led no problem but it still can’t make my web requests. The webhook should simply send info to IFTTT. It sends the info and triggers the event, but only when the BLE module is not connected to the RedBear. I’m starting to think it is the phone itself that is the problem. After all the BLE is being worked on and is still in beta
Hello. Webhook not supposed to work with BLE. BLE commands not transmitted to server and webhook works on server side. Maybe someday we will fix that but this is not our focus at the moment.
Is this still the case? My current project pretty much relies on this. I’m trying to use my Arduino 101 connected over BLE to send a webhook request to the Maker channel in IFTTT. But if Blynk can’t propagate that request … x.x
I haven’t seen anything is the last few months that has changed this.
I think the Bluetooth and BLE option is more meant as a way of controlling (via Blynk app) a local MCU without any need for internet connectivity MCU, not as a way of providing internet connectivity to a MCU. Unfortunately there is still the need of internet connectivity for the app login, so BLE is still more a novelty feature.
As I understand Webhook, Internet connectivity is essential for it to work, thus the MCU and your phone would need internet connection to the server anyhow, so how does your project rely on BLE?
I understand my project may be more of an edge case, at least for now. I understand the different protocols. I’m making an “smart” octopus stuffy for my daughter. I wanted the arduino 101 inside to be able to control our wemo’s to dim the lights on and off for when she get’s up to go to the bathroom at night or gets scared. We have an android phone that’s already always on and currently dedicated to running some home security software, I thought it would make a good go between, communicating over BLE to the arduino and making web requests to toggle the wemo’s. I thought it’d be neat to add some buttons/sliders and make some kind of games between the blynk app and the doll. Webhook wasn’t one of the widgets greyed out with BLE active, if it won’t work perhaps it should be disabled? It just took me a while to figure out why it wasn’t working.
Yep, we missed to mark it as not supported with BLE/Bluetooth widgets.
WebHook is operating on the server listening to the changes in the value of a specific pin, and we have no plans to extend such functionality to mobile clients.
There are a lot of features in BLE support that are waiting to be implemented, but we currently have no time for them.
And the Ultimate Dad award goes to… 
Most of my experience with Bluetooth and BLE link is still undecided, it seems to drop connection randomly, requiring project stop/starts, or sometimes just putting the app in the background and then recalling it, in order to get reconnected.
Personally I would forgo BLE in your home situation as it is likely your local WiFi will be the most stable link between phone and the fuzzy cephalopod when at home… out and about though… thats where I can see the BLE link being useful for short term but limited control options (since the Arduino 101 wouldn’t have any server link, short of cellular).
No worries. Blynk is still a great product, this was just a rare point of frustration. Any plans to add a bonified ifttt intent/channel in the future? That way we could avoid needing the whole maker channel webhook in between 
No. Sorry. We focusing Wi-Fi, Ethernet, GSM.