Agreed, I feel that "mesh" has been reduced to a buzzword akin to "web" 10+ years ago. In particular, this usage of it for EasyMesh begins to feel like a misapp

Agreed, I feel that "mesh" has been reduced to a buzzword akin to "web" 10+ years ago. In particular, this usage of it for EasyMesh begins to feel like a misappropriation. Unfortunately for anyone concerned with clarity, the term describes a topology, not which layer it is implemented on. I constantly find myself using qualifiers like "hybrid mesh cellular" (doesn't exist due to hostile regulation), "link-layer optimization for mesh processing", & "app-layer mesh protocols for decentralized Directed Acyclic Graph consensus". "Mesh", "matrix", "net", & "web" are all terms which are virtually interchangeable in contexts outside the IT realm. "Star" most accurately describes the topology of most people's single-AP WiFi implementations, yet the term is deprecated due to association with a specific old protocol nobody's done much with in thirty years, as far as I know. The whole thing is a linguistic nightmare, from anything but a marketing perspective (marketing loves conflation; it's one of the industry's primary tools). EasyMesh protocol finalization looks like great news for installers & WiFi network admins, but I expect the new range extenders it enables to make the overcrowding situation worse, not better. If it doesn't enable peer nodes to communicate without a centralized point of control, I'd vastly prefer the term "mesh" not be used at all.