this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2026
253 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

88640 readers
3879 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] technomad@slrpnk.net 67 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

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

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 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.

[–] clif@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You're telling me I have to climb on top of that building at night, surreptitiously, AGAIN?

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 weeks ago

DO IT FOR THE ~~VINE~~ MESH!!

[–] non_burglar@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks 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.

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 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

[–] fake@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What are filly mesh settings?

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

The mesh core settings for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks 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.

[–] pageflight@piefed.social 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 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?

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 weeks ago

That's correct. As the bandwidth increases, the radiated power from the transmitter is reduced.

[–] cenzorrll@piefed.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 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.

[–] MrTolkinghoen@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

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

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks 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.

[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks 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

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Also, isn't LoRa based on proprietary technology?

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

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

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 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?

[–] randombullet@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I guess kinda?

I think there are unfortunately only 1 transceiver that supports Meshtastic Meshcore

Semtech SX1262 which is an American company

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 weeks ago

Semtec owns LoRa.

The SX1262 is LoRa generation 2

The LR1110 is LoRa generation 3

And the LR2021 is LoRa generation 4

[–] cenzorrll@piefed.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago

The physical layer is proprietary, the signals it produces is not. So if you can develop a way to reproduce the signals without using or stealing their hardware you're good.

There are efforts to reverse engineer it.

[–] linuxguy@piefed.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago

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

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Very interesting article.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

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

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I bet you also believe apple has the right to block people from repairing their devices.