6 ms·

LoRaWAN fits exactly this use-case and depending on the region, can operate on any of the ISM bands. This article is very bare on technical details, but I'm so

LoRaWAN fits exactly this use-case and depending on the region, can operate on any of the ISM bands. This article is very bare on technical details, but I'm so confused. LoRa's made so much effort in this space by literally mapping out every single ISM band they can (sub-GHz) and reaching out to regulators where they couldn't find a compatible match. Amazon can't possible think 900 MHz device is "free" globally. [0]: https://lora-alliance.org/about-lorawan https://lora-alliance.org/about-lorawan

ecoqba11 7y ago
Yeah, this looks like LoRa
walrus01 7y ago
In Europe/ETSI domains it's the 868MHz band.
ausjke 7y ago
LoRa is a great technology, with longer range and 1/10 of battery usage comparing to its major competitor, NB-IoT. NB-IoT is backed up mobile operators, as far as I know, in China they even outlawed LoRa to pave the way for NB-IoT because the latter can bring revenue for big guns. I will be happy to see LoRA got more attention and used more widely. You can build your own LoRA network across large area with zero monthly fee once it is up and running, and you pay monthly fee to NB-IoT just like your cellphone plan, which one you prefer? Not to mention LoRA is technically better.
- dillonmckay 7y ago
  How do you avoid the monthly fee? I guess I would like to know the hardware setup involved in a large area to avoid any fees. Can you give a theoretical infrastructure requirement?
  - amingilani 7y ago
    Is your question about how to avoid monthly fees with LoRa? You don't have to pay a third party if you've set up your own devices. Your private LoRa network would be akin to your private WiFi network.
    - dillonmckay 7y ago
      Yes, thank you. So, it is just an access point and then some clients, basically?
      - amingilani 7y ago
        Yes! Here's a video by Andreas Spiess, a rising electronics YouTuber, that explains LoRa really well. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMOwbNUpDQA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMOwbNUpDQA
        proffalken 7y ago
        For those of you in the UK or willing to travel, Andreas will be speaking at The Things Conference UK next month: https://thethingsconference.uk https://thethingsconference.uk We have discounts for various groups including Women in Tech and Students, so just contact the organisers and we can sort out any support that you need.
- baybal2 7y ago
  > NB-IoT is backed up mobile operators, as far as I know, in China they even outlawed LoRa to pave the way for NB-IoT because the latter can bring revenue for big guns. First time hearing that, where did you get that?
  - ausjke 7y ago
    it's everywhere, NB-IoT is a sub-standard of whatever the mobile operator is running(3g,4g,LTE,etc), the devices are installed along aside with those radios on the celluar towers, yes they're fully owned by your cell phone providers.
- MrBuddyCasino 7y ago
  They cover different use cases though? NB-IoT offers much more bandwidth than LoRA and consumes much more power.
SergeAx 7y ago
Because of broad signal spectrum LoRa has a built-in problem of handling large number of devices. I hope Amazon came up with something narrow-band, like SigFox.
- amingilani 7y ago
  Could you elaborate? I was under the impression that LoRa's slow updates result in a large number of devices being able to operate smoothly. Also, while the ISM band may be considered "broad," in a sense, LoRa takes a small amount of the band's width (low bandwidth), which translates into a long-range.
  - gioscarab 7y ago
    The problem of LoRa is that is just slotted ALOHA, which maximum data throughput is only 36.8% of the available bandwidth. The more you transmit the more packets collide and data must be retransmitted in a spyral of death, so the system needs to operate using a small portion of the bandwidth not to collapse. Practically if everyone in New York would use LoRa and have dozen of devices in their homes using those bands, the bands would be jammed and nothing would work.
    - awelkie 7y ago
      LoRa is just a PHY, LoRaWAN is the MAC. And last I checked LoRaWAN used ALOHA, not slotted-ALOHA, which is even worse. But I knew a few years ago they were talking about adding beacons to the MAC to enable slotted-ALOHA, so maybe my knowledge is out-of-date?
  - awelkie 7y ago
    The problem is two-fold. First, LoRa is a spread spectrum technology that also has a problem with collisions. Spread spectrum is where the signal bandwidth of your transmission is higher than the information bandwidth, meaning your transmission's spectral efficiency is terrible. But usually spread spectrum systems are designed such that multiple transmissions can occur at the same time without colliding, so the network spectral efficiency is just as good as a narrowband system. But LoRa is a spread spectrum technology that still suffers from collisions, so the network spectral efficiency is really bad. Second, LoRaWAN uses an ALOHA medium access scheme, which also suffers from poor network spectral efficiency compared to basically every other medium access scheme out there. So these two things combined mean that a LoRaWAN network probably won't be able to handle much traffic. Almost all of the media I see about LoRa and LoRaWAN talk about the great range, which is really good, but then gloss over the network performance. So in my opinion LoRa is a bit too hyped at the moment. I also think that when LoRa came out, it was the only PHY that bothered to go down to really low bit-rates, and then the range basically comes from the Shannonn-Hartley theorem. People think that LoRa gets its range from some fancy signal processing tricks or whatever, but I think it's just the fact that they bothered to drop the bit-rate very low. That's basically what SigFox is doing as well, but they're using a more typical narrowband PHY and so probably won't suffer from the same network capacity problems.

ecoqba11 7y ago

Yeah, this looks like LoRa

walrus01 7y ago

In Europe/ETSI domains it's the 868MHz band.

ausjke 7y ago

LoRa is a great technology, with longer range and 1/10 of battery usage comparing to its major competitor, NB-IoT. NB-IoT is backed up mobile operators, as far as I know, in China they even outlawed LoRa to pave the way for NB-IoT because the latter can bring revenue for big guns. I will be happy to see LoRA got more attention and used more widely. You can build your own LoRA network across large area with zero monthly fee once it is up and running, and you pay monthly fee to NB-IoT just like your cellphone plan, which one you prefer? Not to mention LoRA is technically better.

dillonmckay 7y ago
How do you avoid the monthly fee? I guess I would like to know the hardware setup involved in a large area to avoid any fees. Can you give a theoretical infrastructure requirement?
- amingilani 7y ago
  Is your question about how to avoid monthly fees with LoRa? You don't have to pay a third party if you've set up your own devices. Your private LoRa network would be akin to your private WiFi network.
  - dillonmckay 7y ago
    Yes, thank you. So, it is just an access point and then some clients, basically?
    - amingilani 7y ago
      Yes! Here's a video by Andreas Spiess, a rising electronics YouTuber, that explains LoRa really well. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMOwbNUpDQA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMOwbNUpDQA
      - proffalken 7y ago
        For those of you in the UK or willing to travel, Andreas will be speaking at The Things Conference UK next month: https://thethingsconference.uk https://thethingsconference.uk We have discounts for various groups including Women in Tech and Students, so just contact the organisers and we can sort out any support that you need.
baybal2 7y ago
> NB-IoT is backed up mobile operators, as far as I know, in China they even outlawed LoRa to pave the way for NB-IoT because the latter can bring revenue for big guns. First time hearing that, where did you get that?
- ausjke 7y ago
  it's everywhere, NB-IoT is a sub-standard of whatever the mobile operator is running(3g,4g,LTE,etc), the devices are installed along aside with those radios on the celluar towers, yes they're fully owned by your cell phone providers.
MrBuddyCasino 7y ago
They cover different use cases though? NB-IoT offers much more bandwidth than LoRA and consumes much more power.

SergeAx 7y ago

Because of broad signal spectrum LoRa has a built-in problem of handling large number of devices. I hope Amazon came up with something narrow-band, like SigFox.

amingilani 7y ago
Could you elaborate? I was under the impression that LoRa's slow updates result in a large number of devices being able to operate smoothly. Also, while the ISM band may be considered "broad," in a sense, LoRa takes a small amount of the band's width (low bandwidth), which translates into a long-range.
- gioscarab 7y ago
  The problem of LoRa is that is just slotted ALOHA, which maximum data throughput is only 36.8% of the available bandwidth. The more you transmit the more packets collide and data must be retransmitted in a spyral of death, so the system needs to operate using a small portion of the bandwidth not to collapse. Practically if everyone in New York would use LoRa and have dozen of devices in their homes using those bands, the bands would be jammed and nothing would work.
  - awelkie 7y ago
    LoRa is just a PHY, LoRaWAN is the MAC. And last I checked LoRaWAN used ALOHA, not slotted-ALOHA, which is even worse. But I knew a few years ago they were talking about adding beacons to the MAC to enable slotted-ALOHA, so maybe my knowledge is out-of-date?
- awelkie 7y ago
  The problem is two-fold. First, LoRa is a spread spectrum technology that also has a problem with collisions. Spread spectrum is where the signal bandwidth of your transmission is higher than the information bandwidth, meaning your transmission's spectral efficiency is terrible. But usually spread spectrum systems are designed such that multiple transmissions can occur at the same time without colliding, so the network spectral efficiency is just as good as a narrowband system. But LoRa is a spread spectrum technology that still suffers from collisions, so the network spectral efficiency is really bad. Second, LoRaWAN uses an ALOHA medium access scheme, which also suffers from poor network spectral efficiency compared to basically every other medium access scheme out there. So these two things combined mean that a LoRaWAN network probably won't be able to handle much traffic. Almost all of the media I see about LoRa and LoRaWAN talk about the great range, which is really good, but then gloss over the network performance. So in my opinion LoRa is a bit too hyped at the moment. I also think that when LoRa came out, it was the only PHY that bothered to go down to really low bit-rates, and then the range basically comes from the Shannonn-Hartley theorem. People think that LoRa gets its range from some fancy signal processing tricks or whatever, but I think it's just the fact that they bothered to drop the bit-rate very low. That's basically what SigFox is doing as well, but they're using a more typical narrowband PHY and so probably won't suffer from the same network capacity problems.