Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

partyon.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–168 of 168 posts

Re: BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

#161

Post by arashThr »

Gigachad wrote: post #66
syntaxing wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sucks how everything feels like a toy. I think meshtastic is the closest thing to a “product”. They made a bunch of bad architectural decisions that are haunting them now like how nodes broadcast its info.

Because they are toys. For real work it makes so much more sense to use the internet. With the new satellite tech you can reach the internet everywhere. Mesh radio is a fun way to chat with radio nerds in your area. Not a serious infrastructure.

True. But look at the situation in Iran. As much as internet seems like an essential part of daily life, there is the possibility for the governments to shut it down.

Re: BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

#162

Post by adev_ »

wtallis wrote: post #153
adev_ wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meshtastic routing is also completely broken. I am curious about that. What is in particular broken ? Any reason why Meshtastic is not using a well specified / tested a mesh aware routing protocol like BATMAN [1] ? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B.A.T.M.A.N .

I suspect protocols like B.A.T.M.A.N. would consume all available LoRa airtime just with neighbor discovery. On Meshtastic, nodes announcing their presence more than once per hour is seen as unnecessarily talkative. I also don't think it's possible to make Meshtastic into the kind of reliable and high-performance mesh network some users want without effectively dropping support for most battery-powered devices by req…

> I also don't think it's possible to make Meshtastic into the kind of reliable and high-performance mesh network some users want without effectively dropping support for most battery-powered devices

Interesting.

Zigbee has this distinction between router node and non-router node.

Routers are active members of the mesh (relay). Non-routers are just clients.

Most battery devices in Zigbee acts generally as non-router.

It is surprising that Meshtastic did not follow this pattern. Zigbee is not a young protocol.

Re: BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

#163

Post by sandos »

adev_ wrote: post #162
wtallis wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect protocols like B.A.T.M.A.N. would consume all available LoRa airtime just with neighbor discovery. On Meshtastic, nodes announcing their presence more than once per hour is seen as unnecessarily talkative. I also don't think it's possible to make Meshtastic into the kind of reliable and high-performance mesh network some users want without effectively dropping support for most battery-powered devices by req…

> I also don't think it's possible to make Meshtastic into the kind of reliable and high-performance mesh network some users want without effectively dropping support for most battery-powered devices Interesting. Zigbee has this distinction between router node and non-router node. Routers are active members of the mesh (relay). Non-routers are just clients. Most battery devices in Zigbee acts generally as non-router.…

Meshtastic did, in a way. There are roles and settings to disable rebroadcasts, then you are effectively a client. And it is used to preserve battery.

Re: BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

#164

Post by sandos »

varispeed wrote: post #14

100x of what? As someone not too familiar with LoRa, what is the significance and how this could be used? Say I start the node and then what?

100x regular LoRa maybe? Iow 100s of kbps per second. Yes, LoRa can go veeery low in bandwith.

Re: BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

#165

Post by pstuart »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #156
mapt wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These things aren't "Internet Access", they're an easy way to get service that is bandwidth-equivalent to SMS, MMS, IRC or walkie talkie, over complex and distant terrain, without any central coordinating authority. Potentially even acting as last-mile to repeater nodes that pass through the actual Internet. This is a terrifically useful idea of a network in certain conditions, though in other conditions it's probabl…

I didn't assume "internet access", even for machine 2 machine applications, it was a disappointingly low bandwidth. I don't deny a niche of applications, I tried to understand its popularity , and back then I came to the conclusion it was probably illicit use of the technology, not conformant use.

I'd assume that the ability to communicate without depending on cellular service could have a certain appeal.

Re: BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

#166

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

Gigachad wrote: post #74
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We may see a day when the internet is not available, or when interacting with it represents an unacceptable risk. It's a good idea to know how to set up your own.

In that day whatever is jamming starlink will just jam mesh radio too. It'll likely be even easier.

Probably not short range connections. The application layer will have to change but we can still have an internet that operates when we pass each other on the street or share an elevator--the primary bandwidth carrier being devices being physically moved through space, and cross-device chatter being opportunistic.

Also, it might not be jamming. It might be that whoever is operating the satellites at the time denies access unless you enable inspection, and then sells that info to somebody who would hurt you--or whatever other can't-trust-the-middleman dystopia you care to imagine.

Re: BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth

#167

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #156
mapt wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These things aren't "Internet Access", they're an easy way to get service that is bandwidth-equivalent to SMS, MMS, IRC or walkie talkie, over complex and distant terrain, without any central coordinating authority. Potentially even acting as last-mile to repeater nodes that pass through the actual Internet. This is a terrifically useful idea of a network in certain conditions, though in other conditions it's probabl…

I didn't assume "internet access", even for machine 2 machine applications, it was a disappointingly low bandwidth. I don't deny a niche of applications, I tried to understand its popularity , and back then I came to the conclusion it was probably illicit use of the technology, not conformant use.

The people I know playing around with it are interested in something that offers very basic SMS style broadcast without any centralized authority or infrastructure.

For example here on the west coast we have a non trivial probability of earthquakes big enough that a lot of infrastructure may be down for weeks.

Another motivation is political. We've already seen efforts to restrict people's ability to warn others about ICE's activity. So I know some people that while not going full revolutionary or anything, are interested to learn about some peer 2 peer alternatives as a sort of hedge against things getting worse.

And some people just play with it because the tech is neat, it's fun to see how far your messages can get, etc.

Post reply on HN