MatchX no TX

Gateways
36

There have not been any changes in the scheduling logic since we doubled the time-before-tx on March 10 2016 (1bb19bf818). After reading the discussion here (and on Twitter) I just added another 200ms (c8bd97b135) to increase support for slow connections (or slow gateways). I’ll try to have that change deployed later today.

This is definitely not true. In the future we may give application owners the option to prefer authenticated/secure gateways (using MQTT or gRPC over TLS) over unauthenticated/insecure gateways (using JSON over UDP), but that won’t be enabled by default.

The MQTT server in between indeed adds a bit of delay. We’re working hard on reducing this by optimizing our MQTT server. Right now the extra delay is a few milliseconds at worst.

46
463114×496 169 KB

Of course TCP may also add some extra delay on bad connections (TCP packets are retransmitted, whereas UDP packets would simply get lost)

7 Likes
37

Wow this is like the best Xmas present from TTN I could ever hope (yes even better than the TTN gateway :slight_smile: Thank you so much @htdvisser

Yes I think much of the overhead is on packet generation on the client side. But very good to know you’re on top of the server!

4 Likes
38

I still have the “too late” error with the MatchX Gateway.

Fri Dec 22 12:24:29 2017 daemon.info syslog[1428]:
INFO: Received pkt from mote: D000742B (fcnt=46037)
Fri Dec 22 12:24:29 2017 daemon.info syslog[1428]:
JSON up: {“rxpk”:[{“tmst”:2204454315,“time”:“2017-12-22T12:24:28.961510Z”,“tmms”:1197980687961,“chan”:2,“rfch”:1,“freq”:868.500000,“stat”:1,“modu”:“LORA”,“datr”:“SF7BW125”,“codr”:“4/5”,“lsnr”:7.0,“rssi”:-47,“size”:23,“data”:“ACt0ANB+1bNwA+EbAAujBACLA2K81Hg=”}]}
Fri Dec 22 12:24:30 2017 daemon.info syslog[1428]: INFO: [down] PULL_ACK received in 49 ms
Fri Dec 22 12:24:34 2017 daemon.info syslog[1428]: INFO: [down] PULL_RESP received - token[182:216] : )
Fri Dec 22 12:24:34 2017 daemon.info syslog[1428]:
JSON down: {“txpk”:{“imme”:false,“tmst”:2209454315,“freq”:868.5,“rfch”:0,“powe”:14,“modu”:“LORA”,“datr”:“SF7BW125”,“codr”:“4/5”,“ipol”:true,“size”:33,“ncrc”:true,“data”:“IHrmg/62xh41zRa0XrvdYkBYcgohzAzbMejsCECNSLGH”}}
Fri Dec 22 12:24:34 2017 daemon.debug syslog[1428]: src/jitqueue.c:233:jit_enqueue(): ERROR: Packet REJECTED, already too late to send it (current=2208964645, packet=2209454315, type=0)
Fri Dec 22 12:24:34 2017 daemon.info syslog[1428]: ERROR: Packet REJECTED (jit error=1)
Fri Dec 22 12:24:40 2017 daemon.info syslog[1428]: INFO: [down] PULL_ACK received in 49 ms

39

What firmware version is shown in the MatchX cloud interface for your gateway? I think that runs the old firmware.

40

Is there any way for people to see which backend version is active?

(I don’t think Releases · TheThingsArchive/ttn · GitHub tells us?)

41

Still 0.0.3, and there is no update offered in eux.matchx.io

42

I didn’t choose a update myself. They pushed it to 0.0.4 without notifying me after the long discussions. I think you have to contact them on all channels to make them react. :see_no_evil:

43

So, if TTN indeed did not make any changes that caused the problems: any chance MatchX changed the firmware first without all of you knowing that?

44

That is possible and the usual way they seem to act. Unfortunally you don’t have the chance to really know that. You have to believe the firmware version that is displayed.
I won’t expect them to acknowledge any bug that is found to be their fault. By definition it seems that only TTN can be the bad guy.

45

You can get the deployed versions from the discovery server using ttnctl discover [router/broker/handler]:

ID                                   ADDRESS                              VERSION              PUBLIC
==                                   =======                              =======              ======

meshed-router                        thethings.meshed.com.au:1901         v2.9.0-0c455d496d... true
switch-router                        ttn.opennetworkinfrastructure.org... v2.9.0-0c455d496d... true
ttn-router-asia-se                   asia-se.thethings.network:1901       v2.9.1-8477a84c83... true
ttn-router-brazil                    brazil.thethings.network:1901        v2.9.1-8477a84c83... true
ttn-router-eu                        eu.thethings.network:1901            v2.9.1-8477a84c83... true
ttn-router-jp                        router.thethingsnetwork.jp:1901      v2.9.0-dev-e4cb53... true
ttn-router-us-west                   us-west.thethings.network:1901       v2.9.1-8477a84c83... true

v2.9.1 contains the 200ms extra time for slow gateways or gateways on a slow connection

2 Likes
47

Does that include earlier delivery of Join Accept messages to the gateway?

48

You have no idea what you are talking about :grinning: Informed people pushing nonsense, do you even “tech” dude? :thinking:

49

You can see the history of our scheduling code on github.

Yes, all downlink messages should arrive at the gateway earlier now.

3 Likes
50

This is not how we talk to our fellow community members here, @gatewayer. Please treat people with respect. Consider this an official warning.

6 Likes
51

Officially considered

52

To make thinks clear: @gatewayer works at MatchX. If it weren’t for @htdvisser’s reply I’d have blocked you right away.

53

riiiiight :joy:

54

Aaron aka @gatewayer, I’ve already PM’d you that I’m afraid that suspending you will just feed your rants, but don’t think we’ll not do that anyway.*

Some way to treat your customers, wow.

*) guess what, I suspended you after all, after your PM, and after deleting some of your product “recommendations”:

But let’s end this conversation, I feel it’s slowly coming down to your level and I don’t want to go to those depths.

55

We’re done here.

4 Likes