<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>The scenario that GregT identifies also applies in our village,
doubtless also many others.</p>
<p>My intention is to have LibreMesh routers at the key community
centres, each with a modest LiPo and PV panel to keep it alive,
and directional antennae on one or two of the WiFi RF connex. A
panel or collinear, homebrew or commercial for local, Yagi or
recycled PayTV dish with bow-tie on 2.4GHz for point2point links -
or just buy Ubiquiti stuff...</p>
<p>The LibreMesh will be for the use of general community members,
and should provide cached pages of important services; news,
weather, fire, health, and a view of messages and incidents
reported by our community 'first responders', and also messaging
services for general use. Probably limited external comms, need to
conserve bandwidth. We may make available audio feeds of emergency
services mobile radio and our own 2-way network. The
D.R/Meshtastic/ProjectOwl devices, etc are more for these first
responders already equipped and familiar with their function. If
we can get CivTAK happening on both, there will be a map of
incidents available.</p>
<p>Given the turgidity of the authorities, I expect zero integration
with official emergency services, but we can make available a few
useful feeds.<br>
</p>
<p>Assistance in defining all of this more than welcome.</p>
<p>(& Yes, this is a D.R list, but finding the role of D.R in
the wider community is, in my view, key to implementing it.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Greg Hall
0265504481
0428850144
VK2GTH
-</pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 27/9/21 4:21 am, Greg Troxel wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:rmibl4f8af8.fsf@s1.lexort.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Greg Hall <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:greghall@brushbox.info"><greghall@brushbox.info></a> writes:
Lots of interesting thoughts and data points. Will comment only on one:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">5) All of the systems I've played with allow WiFi connex, but it
really is intended that each user has a LORA device, and then the BT
personal area network makes sense. It's the LORA device that has the
identity on the mesh, not the connected user(s).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
I think this is going to be a big deal in community deployments. One
model is a bunch of people who all have disaster.radio (or whatever)
nodes that want to communicate with each other, and the other is also
extending some limited comms to the public (at a community center). So
architecturally keeping the concept of "user" that can access a node,
maybe a different one later, and "node", that speaks the over-lora
routing protocol, separate seems useful but also very difficult.
Not really in response to your message but in general:
When I talked about scalability, I didn't mean the ability to procure
and set up N nodes. I meant: once you have N nodes, does the protocol
work, or does control traffic overwhelm capacity, and do loss rates and
hop counts lead to messages not getting through. Going from 3 to 10 to
30 to 100 is usually a big deal in ad hoc radio systems.
We haven't talked about mobility. Generally, if nodes are known not to
move routing is easier because your update rates can be lower, because
you can believe your topology information for a longer period of time.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>