I feel we should be encouraging people to follow the new guidelines of the community without imposing restrictions on them. Otherwise, wouldn’t this be just taking something away from the community that they already have access to?
The deployed Meshed devices will continue to work fine if the location is deleted. Your profile will continue to have the same count of gateways as well 
Understandably, Meshed has done a fine job with the commercial use of TTN. Though pretty much every location-based resource from the TTN map through to TTN Mapper is disrupted by Meshed AS923-only gateways where split plans are in use. You’ve taken an amazingly defensive stance against @Scobber and a sharp tone with @ccall48 along with us, though I just don’t think you fully realise how common this is at the coal face where split plans are used.
It’s fair to say that it would be best to either upgrade AS923-only gateways, or actively discourage the use of them (remove it from the map seems like an amicable in-between for Meshed deployed devices).
The map is a wonderful resource but just wondering if it can also have a pull-down filter to only show gateways on each configuration. eg Au915, AS923 etc
Now this may also be relevant even in Europe as from distant memory ETSI is looking at releasing some of the 915 band in Europe. If and when this happens, the same requirement to see the gateway’s configuration will exist in Europe.
1 Like
There hasn’t been a feature like that since the initial roll out on either the official map or TTN mapper. Though given how API-first V3 is, here’s hoping there will be a swathe of new location-based resources follow.
1 Like
Huh? I just confirmed that he was correct. No sharpness intended.
Granted I’m a bit removed these days, but I do think there is value in showing that there is a LoRaWAN gateway available, albeit on a different band plan. The problem with the V2 Map and with TTN Mapper is they don’t distinguish between band plans, however the creators of both of those maps have plans to show the band plan in upcoming versions. Users will be able to show just AU915 or AS923 gateways.
If you don’t even show that a gateway is there, even if it is still operating, people may not even try and connect. But if you make them aware that it’s there, albeit not on the standard community band plan, you’ve just scored another community user. I don’ t think that’s a bad thing.
I was told that our equipment was “never fit for the purpose in which you guys were initially paid”.
You bet I’m going to bite back 
Anyway @Scobber and I just met on the recent community call and I suggested we have a chat. I know that gateway is working fine as I have about a year of incoming data from it. The problem may be elsewhere, or maybe I’m mistaken and he’ll provide the info I need to see it.
@TonySmith The map is a wonderful resource but just wondering if it can also have a pull-down selection to only show gateways on each configuration. eg Au915, AS923 etc
Yes both Johan and JP indicated on a recent call that they intend to add support for this on TTN Map and TTN Mapper respectively.
1 Like
Not always a bad outcome - it avoids disappointment and lost interest. When the AU915 coverage does catch up, student projects work at home and at school. Projects built at makerspaces and hackathons work elsewhere as expected. A concept designed at home functions fine at work.
All this combines to a growth rate powered by a single plan TTN region which has been tremendously successful elsewhere in the world.
@leogaggl and co are doing a fine job mediating the way forward. V3 is a prime opportunity to unify the next steps.
We’re still hard at work in the maker/electronics ecosystem - Our maker education and retail efforts reach thousands of Aussie makers/educators/students/engineers/creatives a month - fielding questions for LoRaWAN and TTN on a regular basis in between everything else via workshops/in person/phone/chat/email/forum. Meshed gateways, frequency plans, AS1 vs AS2 - it would be nice to have a unified plan moving forward as a TTN community.
Whatever shape that takes, a big thank you to all those involved and for at least having the conversation.
1 Like
Ultimately we are all on the same train, and I think we’re on the right track. I have attended all the community migration calls organised by Leo so far, and I gave my support to unifying on AU915 from the first call. I guess I can sum up my thoughts by saying let’s add to AU915, not subtract from AS923.
Thank you to @CoreElectronics. You guys have helped build this ecosystem in a big way.
2 Likes
Hi
the other 4 (5) mine is off gateways are all owned by others that I grew up with, and we decided to dive in because of the potential of LoraWAN, now my main motivation i have put my support in is because if this or any other community first network is lost. we will all have to pay the overlords for the privilege of their solution. which will choke hobbyists, and see our younger generation never learn programming and experience what it is like to do something great for no reason but ‘because I can’.
It does pain me to say the DPI gateway pre-dates ours, but ours appear to function far more reliably and at a fraction of the cost. The devices RAK are pumping out are certainly some of the best for price. I also have found over the year or so that the Australian handler has been a poor performer. all the apps I have mucked with are located on the Singapore one. while TTN has been awesome because of the freedoms that we are all able to enjoy. I don’t find much use for trackers and the like when the nation is divided. and there appears to be arbitrary filtering on some gateways.
@Maj is it possible for meshed to get in touch with some of the government deployed gateway owners and compel them to upgrade to a dual radio gateway, because it appears to be the standard in which the community would like their support? You did mention it was their desire to provide access to the community. And as with all technology times change…
Yes, this is definitely doable. We are in discussion with our customers about application and gateway migration to V3 and we will open the dialog about dual band support for those gateways that are AS923 only.
Just thought I’d chime in. I attended a talk by Senquip the other day. They’re going with LTE and WiFi for their application - the primary reason they quoted for not including Lora? The complexity of the network. It added to much to their hardware engineering efforts, and was too complex for their target end users.
Here’s a direct link to that section of the livestream:
Who presumably have power available everywhere.
I’ve got some pretty messed up GSM/LTE setups that have evolved over the years and WiFi coverage can be a challenge. So even those can get ‘complex’ for users.
But neither can run off battery for very long without some sort of power source, either minion changing batteries or solar, which is what makes LoRa so special.
So whilst this company’s strategy is interesting, it is comparing Apples with Oranges.
These guys use a LiPo with Solar option, but he reckons even going with AAs could get a few years - theoretically a decade in an impractical best case scenario - thanks to the low sleep current and being able to only phone home if/when it needs to. Might be higher power while it’s on, but it doesn’t need to be on much.
Australian end users are familiar with LTE, and familiar with WiFi and if they get a device for Australia, it works in Australia - on any LTE network, wherever they are.
I think this kind of really blunt, honest feedback from someone who’s had a serious look at using LoRa for their application is really valuable. Saying it’s Apples and Oranges is not true and a bit of a cheap cop out.
IF TTN is going to get out of its rut in Australia, this is the kind of person who needs to see it as a viable choice - and I think it really reinforces the importance of standardising the network.
LoRa has a much lower cost per device, doesn’t come with any subscription charges per device and if coverage is poor, it is relative inexpensive to provision your own coverage.
I used GSM since 20+ years back. It has its time and place, as does WiFi, 2.4GHz modules, 433MHz modules, microwave, dialup (still), actual runs of cables and IP over Avian.
I’m not sure how saying they have considerable differences is a cheap cop out, for £15 (volumes around the 50 mark) I can build a device with batteries and have a good expectation it will just run for at least two, likely three, maybe four years without any other additional costs. I can’t do that with any other technology I know. So all I’m saying is, sometimes the extra effort is worth it.
If you disagree, I’d love to hear your views, particularly with your experience in the spread out environment which you are in, which parts of the UK due to patchy coverage mirrors at a microscopic scale. We still have some startling dead patches for any radio coverage (like the middle of the second most visited National Park in the world). I’d anticipate you can’t just get a new mobile tower setup, so what else would be available to you?
TTN in Australia, just like it is in the UK for me and everyone in every other country is us/you. If it’s in a rut, getting communities together to solve problems will move it forward. If along the way there are issues with provisioning & complexity, maybe we could collaborate to resolve them?
I think a business in the process of launching its product range is going to go for low hanging fruit like well provisioned areas and is inoculating, via marketing, potential customers coming to them asking for a LoRa version of what they offer. This sort of cherry picking suits me, as I pickup the work where larger companies can’t be bothered.
1 Like
First of all the community (don’t forget TTN is a community network) recognized the issue and is working on it. However forcing people to abandon their investments in existing nodes isn’t likely to win then over so this will take some time.
Second, LoRaWAN in Australia does not have nation wide coverage and given the community nature of TTN it will never happen for TTN (may-be for commercial providers but that’s doubtful as well). Technology using the same infrastructure people use for their (smart) phones will always have an advantage. Same for WiFi as it doesn’t require additional investments due to existing infrastructure.
Then there is the issue of TTN not having an SLA which for a commercial product might well be a deal breaker. All in all you are comparing apples and pears…
1 Like
@descartes don’t disagree with you, but I think you’ve missed my point entirely. I’m not arguing the technical merits of LoRaWAN vs LTE vs Wifi. I’m talking about long term strategy.
The technical benefits of LoRa are irrelevant if it’s too difficult to learn or access relative to what already exists - the reality is that for the majority of people the difficulty is not currently worth the effort. That’s why the dvorak keyboard layout has never taken off. We are in a very small minority of the population who have both the skills and inclination to use it.
@kersing This technology has so much potential benefit for society, but for the most part, LoRa is currently stuck in the realm of amateur radio and without serious investment it’s never going to leave that space in Australia. We just don’t have the population density to get it going purely on a community basis in the way it might be feasible in Europe. The best we can hope for is to piggy back off major projects - government or commercial - and that means making TTN in Australia enticing to people like Norman, but in a way which keeps the door open for public benefit.
How great would it be, if there was TTN Gateway coverage across the entirety of the State and National highway network, rail networks, transmission networks, or the NBN? What about the the TSR? Or national parks? We can get there, but not if you need the current level of RF legal and technical knowledge just to get going.
And that means both reinforcing and promoting the technical strengths of LoRa, softening the learning curve to an extent that may not even currently seem possible, and making sure that we’re at the discussion table when conversations are happening.
I’m not saying tear down everything that’s AS923. But I am very firmly in the camp of, it if it interferes with ease of adoption for newcomers, it should go.
Coming soon, LoRaWAN from space: https://lacuna.space
As well as LoRaWAN I also do High Altitude Balloons and fly sailplanes, they to require a commitment to get past the first few misfires, although LoRaWAN is the least dangerous of the lot but also the most likely to be packaged so that it can be accessible at an appliance level.
I can send out kit that’s pre-provisioned and as long as the technician doesn’t try to “install it” but just plugs it in, it all works fine. When they want to learn how to provision things, that’s where it gets harder, I can provide a user interface to sanitise much of it but I can’t stop them a, messing with the console or b, not learning what all the buttons are for before pushing them.
So we end up with a forum like this that has questions at all & every level that leaves people with the impression that this is Rocket Surgery. But as I said before, it’s up to the community - if we think this technology has benefits which we wish to share, then we need to come up with the tools to make working with it easier.
1 Like
Now this is a good idea - though standardising this will be an even bigger nightmare.
Perception is reality. It’s a real pain, but an fact of life.
110% on board there.
Many people believe their perception is reality but reality is absolute. It’s how people view the world that determines how they do things. I didn’t perceive any issues with LoRaWAN when I got stuck in to it in earnest a couple of years back. But then I’ve never forgot how to learn things and, to borrow a NLP phrase, I know the map is not the territory. [Nota bene my user name!]
LoRaWAN is harder than walking & chewing gum, but once people learn to learn, they can methodically pick up the basics in a day and progress from there. Still doesn’t stop us from helping them out by making the journey simpler.
Maybe, but people act on their perceptions of reality - whether or not those align with facts. That’s what I mean when I say perception is reality - you only have to read over this thread to see that!