Helium Network Comparative Discussion

[descartes (Nick McCloud)]

@jfmateos

I think it is not a matter of money, but a question of organization and usefulness.

^^^^^ This!

@jfmateos

It’s very difficult for a sole community to organize this kind of activities, but it would be easier with the back of a broader scope organization like TTN core, that would promote these projects to a global status (people usually is most prone to collaborate in big projects with mediatic repercussion).

I’ll ponder on creating a separate topic for a discussion like this - it should not be beyond the community to come up with some template materials for communities or individuals to deliver at all levels.

[pvolodin]

@johan

…
The usage data records (UDRs) that sNS (Helium) provides to forwarders (their roaming partners) are not trustworthy. This is not a problem specific to Helium;
…

For Helium, this isn’t a just a problem; it seems to be a showstopper.

[pvolodin]

@descartes

@pvolodin

Sorry for complete off-topic

Try looking in the categories at the top of this page???

Does this mean there’s no problem with the link posted on Github? Though I agree, I should raise an issue there, not discuss it here.

[pe1mew (Remko)]

Some of my cents (2 this time) in to this discussion:

The strength of the LoRaWAN implementation of TTN and Chirpstack is its simplicity. The ease with which I can expand coverage by adding an uncomplicated gateway. A gateway that has low demands on administration, connectivity and power.

This is the Achilles heel of the implementation of Helium. They made their Hotspot unnecessary complex and with the complexity, the reliability was heavily affected. Their implementation is not scaleable.

Although I am a strong supporter of the knowledge incentive, this incentive is not enough to engage the serious growth of TTN. I feel that communities and consistent contributors to TTN shall be rewarded more than with just a pat on the back with the message “you know very much, well done”.

We have seen the power of crypto now. I am not sure if the side effects are worth it. I do know that in TTN we have to evolve and move to a higher level.

[pvolodin]

@pe1mew

Although I am a strong supporter of the knowledge incentive, this incentive is not enough to engage the serious growth of TTN. I feel that communities and consistent contributors to TTN shall be rewarded more than with just a pat on the back with the message “you know very much, well done”.

The LoRa Alliance was created to solve this issue. To promote LoRaWAN. If this technology was popular enough, you knowledge would be paid well.

[pe1mew (Remko)]

Either you are cynical or you missed my point.

[pvolodin]

Cynical. LoRaWAN still is more a toy than a tool. Sorry. What reward are you expecting for playing toys?

[pe1mew (Remko)]

@pvolodin

LoRaWAN still is more a toy than a tool

So true, LoRaWAN is still hitting a glass ceiling through which it seems not able to break through. With this in mind, I am very interested to see if Helium can fulfil its promise. I do not see the massive growth in traffic they are envisioning coming. If ever.

I monitor the number of unique device addresses that are heard by the gateways I manage and see this result: Last 24 hours TTN 12.75%, KPN 86.4% and Helium 0.859%.

[wienkegiezeman]

A few things we can conclude with data from TTN, TTI, Sigfox, NB-IoT and LoRa operator networks.

• The LPWAN network economics some expected to be there in 2015 don’t work. LPWAN networks are almost impossible to monetize effectively with a healthy profit.
• It is the solution that brings in the value. And the solution requires the network to be tuned to that solution and operated with the anchor solution in mind. General purpose networks are very hard to build in a WAN setup in LPWAN, the market is moving towards using LPWAN in a LAN setup.
• Separation of LPWAN network and LPWAN solution economics is very hard. Best effort LPWAN packet forwarding is the best that can be done as a network value generation model.
• People are loving LoRaWAN because of long range and low power and that market is growing fast, 60% YoY. Mostly in a LPLAN setup.

Taking these observations into account we have a very optimistic view of the future. As the device growth is still very high on our network, so is usage. Again, our data show most usage is LPLAN and no traffic is shared across accounts. But the best efforts forwarding is super cool and allows for a lot of enterprise, government and community synergies that bring value all ways. Also we see a lot of synergies with network sharing with upcoming satellite IoT companies. Opening up closed nationwide LoRa networks through peering could bring synergies but they first have to accept that the business model is not in the network. Once they get that it will bring some opportunities.

Very nice discussion above. Some of my comments.

@jfmateos

I have a gateway at home because it is useful for me; I use it to monitor the flat’s door, the cellar’s door (10 levels below), bedrooms’ temperatures, the fridge, the mailbox, and the balcony plants.

My gateway is in TTN because it is useful for me borrowing other members’ gateways when my nodes are far away from home; for example, the tracker of my car, or my mother-in-law’s flat door, or the trackers in the backpacks of my sons.

This sums up completely what TTN is about now. And it is pretty awesome. It is indeed private use and contributing to a best effort forwarding network.

@jfmateos

So, I strongly feel that using payments/donation in TTN would not help to extend the network; it could even become a handicap because it introduces a new layer of complexity.

Very much agree. Hence there is no transaction model. The lack of the transaction model is the power in best effort LPWAN forwarding. Just like with regular internet IP peering.

@jfmateos

I consider that TTN (core+communities) should promote global projects to help to publicize what LoRaWAN is and the benefits of TTN network.

Hence we have a webinar every 2 weeks and conferences around the global, Amsterdam, Hyderabad, Slovenia, Italy, London, Adelaide, etc

@jfmateos

It’s very difficult for a sole community to organize this kind of activities, but it would be easier with the back of a broader scope organization like TTN core, that would promote these projects to a global status (people usually are more prone to collaborate in big projects with mediatic repercussion).

This is something TTN can improve on. In the next Amsterdam conference we’ll have more community projects being presented. I also feel this is the task of the TTN community itself. There are some globally exchangeable ideas but most are local.

@jfmateos

I feel that communities are a TTN strength (compared to other networks) that is not being fully leveraged.

Agree, for global collaboration the community pages and structure could use an upgrade that is more aligned with the current market. Applications value far above networks and gateways.

@pe1mew

I feel that communities and consistent contributors to TTN shall be rewarded more than with just a pat on the back with the message “you know very much, well done”.

The strength of the transaction-less model is that nobody owes you anything, not even a pat on the back, Or maybe it is time for a PatCoin? (That was a joke ) I (and I guess people in general) give you pats on the back and love your work not because of your gateways but because you are genuinely a nice and curious community guy that shares a lot of knowledge

@pe1mew

So true, LoRaWAN is still hitting a glass ceiling through which it seems not able to break through

Are you in the right glass building then? There is massive growth in traffic and devices across The Things Stack product usage. So I don’t see any limitation for growth at the moment. The growth will always be where the value is created. And that is not in the networks.

[Caspar]

Although I am a strong supporter of the knowledge incentive, this incentive is not enough to engage the serious growth of TTN. I feel that communities and consistent contributors to TTN shall be rewarded more than with just a pat on the back with the message “you know very much, well done”.

I do not want money (as cash) for expanding the network. I am a big fan of open infrastructure, i support Freifunk (german open WiFi) for example too, TTN for me is something similar. I even miss the “pat on the back” from TTI from time to time. Example: You will tell us how many gateways there are now live at the conference like every year, but what about tell us how many of those are from communities and not from companies or so? What about some real content for communities on the conference? Most is about companies selling there newest stuff… what about some free tickets for some of the communities (dont know how to distribute them, needs to get some thinking on it), what about a “beta” program so some of the communities can have a look at new features before they get rolled out? How about some bugfixing on the community pages? How about some presence on community events (Chaos Communication Congress, Gulasch Programmiernacht, FrOSCon, etc. - of course in other countries too - but i know only the ones on germany)? How about a community manager?

Make it more fun to be part of the network, more meta community meetings, more pats on the shoulder, more info to the community, Thats just a list coming to my mind - thx!

[pvolodin]

@wienkegiezeman

There is massive growth in traffic and devices across The Things Stack product usage. So I don’t see any limitation for growth at the moment.

IMO TTN stack seems to be too EU-centric. It surely is a limitation that prevents its adoption in the US and some other countries.

[Jeff-UK]

Would be interested in hearing your reasons for that assertion as TTS is (as I understand it) driving ever closer to LoRaWAN secification and certification as defined by the L-A so any such bias likley has its roots there…

…also I woud be interested in the take on your comment from our Aussie friends as I beleive they have been the first large scale deployers of the offering, driving the beta etc.and collaborating closely with the TTI team on its implementation… and of course AU follows a mix of US915, as AU915 varient, and AS923 based implementations without issue which would give the lie to any such assertion surely?

Also historically LoRa and later LoRaWAN were driven out of EU based developments, with adaptations needed to reflect e.g. US regulations, and indeed those imposed by other territories, before deployments globally were possible…hence the EU side has always had some degree of inbuilt momentum with the technology, but I perceive that as being increasingly difuse on a global basis as the technology has evolved and become more widely adopted.

[pvolodin]

@Jeff-UK
Well, let me share my personal experience

https://www.waterworld.com/water-utility-management/asset-management/press-release/14203331/mueller-ferguson-waterworks-deliver-lorawan-class-b-nodes-with-ami-system

Two 64-channel gateways. 3400+ Class B nodes with 30 dBm max TX power (you can use 30 dBm only when 50+ channels are enabled, otherwise, sorry, 20 dBm is max.).

Could TTN be used for that project?

I see no 64-channels plan at GitHub - TheThingsNetwork/lorawan-frequency-plans: LoRaWAN Frequency Plans for The Things Stack.

And there’s no class B support in the US: Support dynamic class B ping slot frequency · Issue #3686 · TheThingsNetwork/lorawan-stack · GitHub

And I know a number of other project in the US where TTN stack doesn’t fit while, for instance, Chirpstack does.

[KrishnaIyerEaswaran2 (Krishna Iyer)]

@pvolodin

And I know a number of other project in the US where TTN stack doesn’t fit while, for instance, Chirpstack does.

@pvolodin: Can you start a separate thread on this? We’d be interested to see what’s missing. From past experience, some things that we hear complaints are missing are basically not properly documented or not easy to work with and some things are probably already on the roadmap.

[tomtobback]

When serious money can be made, in an anonymous way, things get ugly. Helium has recently been forced to sanction several ‘authorized vendors’, banning Deeper (10k hotspots), and suspending PantherX for 1 year (68k hotspots).

This guy claims people on the ‘Manufacturing Compliance Committee’ have been doxxed and receiving death threats.

As managing the denylist is a potentially dangerous job, Helium has launched Crowdspot, "a tool that allows the community to contribute to the Denylist by voting on abnormal Hotspots. Abnormal Hotspots can be defined as those with suspicious RSSI/SNR/Distance values or only witness Hotspots from the same Maker, indicating gaming on the Helium Network".
A curious mix of decentralised responsibility and a powerful central committee.

Screenshots from Discord

[pvolodin]

@KrishnaIyerEaswaran2

… some things that we hear complaints are missing …

I am not complaining I was able to modify CS sources to add some features which were missed the day I needed them, and most proably will be able to do the same with TTS if there’s a reason.

@KrishnaIyerEaswaran2

Can you start a separate thread on this?

I’m going to just raise a couple of issues on GitHub.

[descartes (Nick McCloud)]

@tomtobback

This guy claims people on the ‘Manufacturing Compliance Committee’ have been doxxed and receiving death threats.

As managing the denylist is a potentially dangerous job, Helium has launched Crowdspot, "a tool that allows the community to contribute to the Denylist by voting on abnormal Hotspots. Abnormal Hotspots can be defined as those with suspicious RSSI/SNR/Distance values or only witness Hotspots from the same Maker, indicating gaming on the Helium Network".
A curious mix of decentralised responsibility and a powerful central committee.

Ugly??? This is down right absurd - it’s technology for small devices to send data and they have a “Manufacturing Oversight Committee” that hears testimonies - is it televised like Judge Judy or something.

I think this post alone will help me solidify the case against using Helium.

[pvolodin]

@pvolodin

I believe we’ll see some 100K used Helium miners (and a lot of accessories), competitively priced (way less than $100), on eBay relatively soon.

https://www.reddit.com/r/HeliumNetwork/comments/wkjal0/comment/ijnquss/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

[bertrik]

On the point of getting “rewarded” and why people are motivated to run community gateways:
What I would like to know more about, is how TTI views the relation between them and the community.

As far as I know, the community part is what kickstarted TheThingsNetwork, with people setting up gateways often out of their own pocket and extending the network that way. On the other hand, just having gateways is not everything, you need servers/storage/computing power/software development for the backend. I can imagine that without TTI TheThingsNetwork would not have existed anymore. Judging from the responses I see here on the forum, it sometimes feels to me like community users are seen as second-rate users of the network / freeloaders (but of course TTI is not responsible for alle comments here)

So things I wonder about:

• How useful is the community part of TheThingsNetwork actually to TTI? for example in term of community gateways? I can imagine that commercial setups with TTI just roll out their own gateways, with verified coverage, while community gateways can come and go, many of them not at particularly good locations.
• What would TTI like to see from the community? What can the community do for TTI? An emphasis on practical applications was mentioned earlier. I think for community applications this could be citizen science sensing projects, like measuring air quality (particulate matter), environmental noise, etc. I love to help with that (already doing stuff like that).

Personally, and in practical terms, thing I would like to see for the community gateways:

• A kind of notification system, so when a gateway goes down I get notified and can do something about it quickly.
• Get the gateway map back up in a more useful state, e.g. make it display the owner (if made public) so people can more easily contact the gateway owner. For coverage, I’m actually using ttnmapper.org
• In general, I’m just very curious about how “useful” the gateways I administer are. For example, is it passing actual useful traffic, or is it mostly redundant with other gateways? How much of the traffic is peered with other networks? Where are the bottlenecks / gaps?

[Johan_Scheepers]

@bertrik

A kind of notification system, so when a gateway goes down I get notified and can do something about it quickly.

You are aware of the API to get gateway statistics, in the json you can see if it is online or offline (but I am telling you something you know), so then you need a few lines of code to push a notification to your preferred platform (e-mail, telegram, SMS, WhatsApp).

@bertrik

In general, I’m just very curious about how “useful” the gateways I administer are. For example, is it passing actual useful traffic, or is it mostly redundant with other gateways? How much of the traffic is peered with other networks? Where are the bottlenecks / gaps?

And you are aware this same API can provide you with rxRate and txRate. You should know how many nodes you have and their rxRate and txRate, form this you can deduct if your gateway service more than just you.

You could also log the rxRate and txRate of the gateways you are interested in to a db. From this you can see if there are bottlenecks / gaps?