RPi + ic880a gateway in suburb of small city in the North of Scotland passes 3m uplinks:
For those who doubt the RPi with microSD card… 555 days uptime:
$ uptime
11:03:16 up 555 days, 17:00, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00
$ df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/root 14G 4.4G 8.3G 35% /
/dev/mmcblk0p6 66M 22M 45M 32% /boot
$
MicroSD card is SanDisk 16GByte.
nice…
Nice one Tim. I have a couple of Pi gateways still chugging away in Edinburgh, one at 4.4m and one at 4.7m uplinks. I should throw the second one a 5m party soon…
Not quite that much uptime though, a few power cuts. On the plus side, the power cuts didn’t knacker the file systems!
Is it me or does the Transmitted Messages count seem low for this?
not really remember all GW’s in range of nodes will be counting uplinks, though only the rf closest equivalent/ strongest signal GW’s will be asked respond to acks, join request grants, command downlinks etc. Esp this can be low if the nodes the gw is servicing are essentially bubble-up nodes operating for long uptimes with any need to rejoin or asking for acts etc. I have some GW’s with quite high uplink counts 0.5-1.5m up with low downlink values where this is the case
Hi @jezd, the 3m uplinks includes non-TTN uplink traffic received, forwarded to the TTN core and then discarded at the core. In this case that’s a lot, probably >90% as I’m in the middle of a large SmartCity deployment of managed street-lighting that uses 35k LucyZodion lights and an OrbiWise LoRaWAN core. Obviously there won’t be any downlinks to those devices via my TTN gateway.
So I think that you’re both right and wrong. You’re right that an uplink:downlink ratio of 1000:1 would be odd for all-TTN traffic. You’re wrong in that we work in a multi-network world so the numbers are not simple and need more information to interpret them correctly. You could also be wrong that a better-placed gateway is doing all the downlink work.
Wouldn’t those be using the private network preamble rather than the public network one?
The preamble detector does leak through mismatches, but at a lower rate than it would receive matches.
Hi @cslorabox, The OrbiWise traffic is all on device addresses from:
0x10/0x11 World: Orbiwise (0x08)
per the TTN documentation of LoRa Alliance assigned address prefixes, so I think that it’s public network traffic.
Device addresses and preambles are entirely distinct things.
Device address is a software construct, preamble effectively a hardware one handled inside the Semtech radio chips.
Hi @cslorabox, OrbiWise is a global public LoRaWAN operator, like a commercial version of TTN. The system here is part of their global multi-tenant infrastructure with roaming. The local govt. streetlight application is the anchor-tenant on what is planned to be a multi-customer and multi-application SmartCity LoRaWAN service. Why would they set the preamble sync_word to private?
For one of my gateway that has been on TTN for 4 years, it has 3.34M uplinks and 322K downlinks where most of this time I’ve been pretty much the only user.
Andrew
Tim is correct wrt Orbiwise being global and offering a “public” network similar to others. More comparable to TTI than TTN in many respects. Sadly through this year we have lost some biz & GW deployments to them 
where original use/target was to have been TTN/TTI… increasing back end UDP load issues & console stability etc. haven’t help matters. I also see occasional Orbiwise traffic hitting some of my gw’s… increasing my up counts but not impacting down counts of course (to bring back to topic!) 