IMO, when a project starts based on flawed assumptions, it is sure to be short-lived. See, I have nothing against mesh networks or location-based services. I've

IMO, when a project starts based on flawed assumptions, it is sure to be short-lived. See, I have nothing against mesh networks or location-based services. I've personally done some things using decawave chips, and I think it's amazing. The point here is that "location doesn't matter" when we're talking about networking. Let's say we have a football team. you have three teammates near the goal, two of the defense guys are right next to the goal, closer to you. And there is the third, an excellent striker, who is a little further from the goal. Who do you kick the ball to? And let's say it's not a good day for your best player and he's tired because he's been partying for three days, would you rather shoot straight for the goal? The point is that all this QOS confusion exists for a good reason, because good routers and network devices have become bad for the most different reasons, and the network must ADAPT to that, and location is a STATIC value, so it doesn't matter. BGP was invented so we could not worry about location. The message gets there, no matter the condition. If you're not connecting to the closest device in the mesh, you already have a problem. This means that despite the power, your mesh router is probably overloaded by some other device, does not like its packets, has been partying for three days, or it's just bugged, so either way it will find the next possible glimpse of the network connection to deliver its message. That made the INTERNET resilient.