Although everyone has their own reasons for exploring a new hobby, one of the driving factors behind the popularity of Meshtastic and MeshCore has been the incredible accessibility offered by off-grid LoRa mesh networks. You don’t need any expensive hardware or a license to get on the air — armed with a $20 microcontroller dev board and open source software, you could be on the mesh in minutes. Then came the really exciting part, seeing who else was out there. The low barrier of entry and ad-hoc nature of these projects meant there was a good chance you’d soon find yourself exchanging messages with other like-minded folks in the area.

Or at least, that’s how it used to be. With the recent revelation that their default radio configurations have potentially been in violation of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) regulations governing amateur usage of the 900 MHz industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) band, the users and developers of both Meshtastic and MeshCore have been sent scrambling. Getting in compliance isn’t necessarily a technical challenge. In fact, Meshtastic has already introduced changes aimed to address the issue and anyone running the latest alpha release can be sure that their initial radio configuration will meet FCC standards.

But unfortunately, this introduces a new problem. While it’s easy enough to get new installations of Meshtastic and MeshCore operating in a mode that keeps the FCC happy, doing so breaks compatibility with everything that’s already been deployed. The community will be fractured into distinct strata depending on when they first configured their hardware, with an added dash of confusion from the more rebellious users who will undoubtedly refuse to migrate over to the new settings.

all 57 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 72 points 1 month ago (6 children)

This seems like it might only cause a temporary fragmentation (hopefully) until everyone eventually switches over to the new version right?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Yes with the asterisk that a decent amount of the off-grid hardware hidden in trees around the country will probably never get a firmware update. Because people have either forgotten about them or can no longer reach them. It's already a big issue with orphaned nodes running outdated firmware clogging up the default LongFast channels in more densely populated areas.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    It's already happened at least twice with meshtastic, first with the mqtt to internet bridge topic causing flooding and the meshrouting protocol itself being capped too low and causing chaos at big events like defcon.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 1 month ago* (2 children)

    Please do not use the filly mesh settings outside of filly because they interfere with the 33 centimeter amateur radio repeater inputs.

    If you want to test, a safe place to test is...

    MeshCore

    • Freq: 910.100
    • BW: 500
    • SF: 10

    Meshtastic: LongTurbo

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 month ago (16 children)

    I've heard of Meshtastic and Meshcore but haven't really looked into it. I'm very interested in getting started and what all I need to do it, if anyone has some good information or sources. With the state of the way the internet is becoming and I now self-host my own media server, I would like to make this one of my next setups.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    Pretty much the only step is picking a device - do you just want a little stick for testing or making a repeating station, or would you rather have a more standalone device with a big (relatively) screen and maybe a keyboard? Do you want/need GPS? Consider how you're going to power it - pro tip, discarded "single use" vapes are a great source of small rechargeable LiPos.

    Both Heltec and LilyGo are good choices with regards to reliability and compatibility. Go on their websites and get an idea of what's out there, then pick one and you'll be up and meshing the same day you receive it!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (11 children)

    Since you covered the important bits, I'd add :

    ESP32 if you want WiFi but short battery life, nRF52 if you want long battery life but no WiFi.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (10 children)

    Will definitely probably want wifi, so ESP32 will probably be the route for that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (6 children)

    You can get a kit for $200 or so that comes with solar, battery, WiFi, Bluetooth, LoRa antenna, … it’s pretty much plug and play by that point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)

    Any recommendations on a quality full kit?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    I have this one for Meshtastic and it works great, but uses Bluetooth for configuration rather than WiFi: https://www.seeedstudio.com/SenseCAP-Solar-Node-P1-Pro-for-Meshtastic-LoRa-p-6412.html

    Same product but with Meshcore instead: https://www.seeedstudio.com/SenseCAP-Solar-Node-P1-Pro-for-Meshcore-p-6741.html

    I don’t have this one, but it has WiFi as well: https://www.newegg.com/p/0XP-06T7-000M3?item=9SIC4NEKST8969

    Without wifi lowers the power requirements, probably better suited for a solar setup. Not sure how reliable that last one would be, but worth a shot I’m sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    Is there any difference in the hardware between Meshtastic and Meshcore? I didn't think there was... but I haven't been keeping a close eye on it.

    I have a lot of RAK4631 based builds and I flashed a few from Meshtastic to Meshcore, said "meh", then flashed back to Meshtastic. So ... I assume no hardware difference. I think it's mostly just the software/routing protocol that is different (which is why I stuck with Meshtastic).

    EDIT: Also tried RNode (Reticulum) on the same hardware which was... interesting, but a silly protocol to have on a solely LoRa device.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    Yeah I believe the difference is at the protocol layer. The links I provided come preloaded with either software respectively. I don’t think there’s a difference in the hardware of the two offers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    I breezed through the other replies and didn't see anyone asking why you want wifi.

    If you're going to hang a node somewhere and have it solar powered, the nRF52 will give you waaaaaaaaay longer life and easier (solar) recharging. I've got nodes that have been out (unmaintained) for three or four years now, running on a 2,000mAh battery and 2x crappy 60mA@5v solar cells, and they've never dropped out as far as I can tell... even in deep winter when you shouldn't be charging lithium-ion battery packs in sub freezing temps : )

    I'm probably dumb, but I don't see why anyone wants wifi from a LoRa node when all it does is rob power/longevity without adding any benefit that I can think of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Thanks for your opinion. I probably wouldn't need wifi. I just thought it might good to have it so why not lol. I really don't know much about it all yet. Definitely would rather have the much longer battery life if there really isn't a need for wifi.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago*

    If it helps for comparison, my esp32 got about 2.5 days on a 2,000mAh battery. My nrf52 gets about 10 days on the same battery.

    Edit: that was with no charging at all, just "plug it in and see how long it lasts"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Thanks for the information. Honestly, with not knowing much about it, I'm not sure what I'd want in my setup yet, haven't had much time to look into it more yet. I will definitely check out their websites. Thanks again.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    dictates the minimum allowed bandwidth. Out of the box MeshCore operates at 62.5 kHz and Meshtastic uses 250 kHz, but the FCC says it needs to be 500 kHz or higher.

    Why is more bandwidth better? Is it spreading out the same energy = less interference potential? Usually the goal is to use the least bandwidth (and power) possible, right?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    You're correct in your understanding, but one problem is that Lora isn't spread spectrum in the traditional sense(s). It's a narrow band signal that traverses over a wide band as it's method of modulation/encoding. The FCC has regulations for direct sequence spread spectrum (entire transmission is spread out) and frequency hopping spread spectrum (narrowband signal, randomly transmitted within a range). Lora is neither, using chirp spread spectrum (narrowband signal travels up and down within it's bandwidth).

    The ideas as I understand them in the regulations is that a full spread transmission has lower amplitude and isn't strong enough at any frequency to interfere with other transmitters, and the pseudo random spread doesn't stay anywhere long enough to completely interfere on any one frequency. Lora isn't either, but it is low power and traverses it's bandwidth quickly, so it most closely follows the direct sequence spread spectrum method if you remove your glasses and squint.

    This sharp transmission, but travelling over a wide range is what makes it able to transmit over such long distances. It has the signal to noise of Morse code, and interference tolerance of direct sequence spread spectrum.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    So this is trying to hamstring it, right? Pushing it higher reduces range?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Yes, having higher bandwidth means that the range is reduced because the receiver has a wider bandwidth to listen to and there's more radio noise in wider bandwidth.

    However, at least in the US, we are allowed to use up to 1 watt, whereas those poor Russians are only allowed to use 0.025 watts.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    Since at least the early 90s we've seen a continuum of unlimited variations on themes, and we're still here. But somehow, having to adjust to one more new change is going to "shatter" everything. This is like seeing "Game Over!" in a youtube title.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Also, isn't LoRa based on proprietary technology?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Yes. The actual modulation itself is proprietary, but everything above that is open source.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Regardless, if let's say the company producing the hardware decides to stop producing it, then there's nothing anyone else can do about producing new ones, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (12 children)

    Switch to Reticulum. Meshtastic/Meshcore were never scalable traffic/node wise.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    totally different things. reticulum is routing, meshtastic is the transport. you don't route anything without a transport

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    I think LoRA is what you meant and yes, both use it. Reticulum has its own routing protocol while Meshtastic broadcasts to all connected devices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    in that case, meshtastic does not do routing. like a network switch or a wifi AP is not a router (except combined consumer devices but that's an other thing)

    though, doesn't meshtastic have some kind of relayed operation? that would count as routing, I think.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Right! I think Meshtastic is closer to how switches work with STP and network broadcasts. This allows for multiple devices to relay the same message but it's not the same as routing.

    Reticulum goes a step further with directing messages to specific paths and destinations in the network like a router would as you said, rather than broadcasting the encrypted message to all it can reach.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Wdym? Reticulum is super promising, but it needs a path, no? I could well be misunderstanding, but Meshtastic is more like "infrastructure". You can actually send Reticulum over Meshtastic/Meshcore (though you may choke the network :/). Seems to me that even if you're excited about Reticulum, you'd still want those Meshtastic networks built out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    I think this may overestimate how unwilling the average community member is to operate pirate radio

    ETA: I do believe in sharing the airwaves responsibly, since bandwidth is limited, I might just feel a bit defiant towards the current FCC

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    Here I was hoping for an article talking about how long turbo's range vs long fast is terrible.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Very interesting article.

  • source
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    IMO they should have a set, compliant default for the radio and not allow users to change it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment