TTN network stack V3 central 2


#1

Its finally here ! :sunglasses:

excited


Multicast support on TTN
TTN network stack V3 central 1
(Matthew Macdonald-Wallace) #2

I’ve written up some early notes on getting v3 running without Docker: Running V3 on Centos


TTN network stack V3 central 1
#3

Awesome! Some links to add:


#4

warning

Hey y’all; for those migrating devices off the public community network or private network, please wait for the 3.0.0 tagged release that will be available shortly. There will be some breaking changes in the database so you’d need to throw away the local databaseThis is very inconvenient but this was the last opportunity to do this. From 3.0.0 on, the first breaking storage and API change that we can’t migrate will be V4


(Junqing) #6

Hello, can I ask when it will be operational on the community network?


(Verkehrsrot) #7

I want to test the v3 stack with a node running LoRaWAN 1.0.2.

Is there a TTN v3 test server somewhere in the public internet, which i could use for the test?


#8

you tell me… I have the same probs :wink:


(Verkehrsrot) #9

Hmm, i’m sure someone out there already did a docker install in some cloud. Please, let us share…


(Sritam2) #10

It is a great contribution of TTN to open source the V3 stack. But you guys have put in a lot of hard work. When you make the source code open source, then many people will establish their own private server in the gateways and will no longer want to use the services of TTI or TTN despite having good internet connection. Will this not cut the revenues of TTI as you are giving all your hard work to community for free?


#11

We need to build a few things for that, most importantly peering (so that all gateways are available in V2 and V3 at the same time) and a V2 compatibility layer around the V3 Identity Server so that V2 services keep working. Then, we start deploying V3 PCN clusters to which you can migrate your applications.

Currently, our first priorities are getting a 3.0.0 tagged release out, fix development tooling and finish the Console.

I think V3 PCN clusters become available in preview in May.

No, you need to set that up yourself for the time being. We’re gonna do that, but we’re only going to do that right, i.e. with peering and the same user accounts, for a smooth experience.

Thanks for raising this.

We believe that there is no commercial value in a proprietary LoRaWAN stack. It is a solved problem. There are other open source LoRaWAN initiatives too. Note that all successful development tools (web servers, databases, frameworks, compilers, IDEs, etc) are open source. Offering a proprietary LoRaWAN server stack is either creating vendor lock-in for no apparent reason, or hiding a mess of a codebase.

When building an open, crowd sourced and decentralized network, we want to do that in a transparent way, i.e. doing it open source. Our stacks have been open source from day 0.

As for the community setting up their own networks; I rather have them use The Things Network Stack V3 for that than another stack. This is because V3 is built for the future, scalable, and it will support peering with the public community network, so that still it becomes part of the global network. Also, should these private networks one day be migrated to the public community network or to a commercial private network, then no APIs are changed and devices can be migrated seamlessly.

As for our commercial initiative setting up own open source networks; for the context, The Things Industries provides services and proprietary functionality for enterprise use. TTI offers SLA, commercial support, some advanced monitoring and alerting features, a scalable Kubernetes self hosted or private cloud hosted deployment, multi-tenancy, advanced integrations with commercial cloud platforms, an on-premises Join Server with HSM support, etc, then that is where value is added. And here again, if businesses start using the open source distribution but want commercial services later, we can do that seamlessly. Finally, our larger customers are happy that our stack is open source, because it is a more sustainable model (anyone can become a maintainer by forking) and it allows for easy quality assurance and auditing.


Class c device
Controlling a gate with downlink limitations?
Class C and Community uses?
(Amir Sarla) #12

Hi,
We have already implemented Class A and Class C on STM32L072RZ Nucleo board and have verified its functionality on TTN.
We have successfully connected on TTN server with both Class A and C but not sure how to verify Class A or C on the server end (TTN).
Is there any way we can confirm whether data is from Class A or Class C.

Please guide.


(Vinzen01) #13

Hi,
I am using the build-in MQTT broker for class A up-link and down-link message test. The LoRaWan stack version is V3.0.0-RC2.

I can successfully get the up-link message from the node device. But for the down-link message, I think it doesn’t work.

From the host PC, I open two terminals. One receives message with mosquitto_sub, and the other send out the message with mosquitto_pub. I use the following command to send out the message:

mosquitto_pub -u app1 -P NNSXS.UCV7QADOLDV5YAEPRVE6HBX3AFK22CVBWYAMKBQ.KNM665HUYJK7D3ZLRXORDXUGRIYQGOSQ6WHZQSF24RQAGSDSUOKA -h localhost -t "v3/app1/devices/dev1/down/push" -m '{"downlinks": [{"f_port": 15,"frm_payload": "QkJCQg==", "confirm": true}]}'

I think that I should receive this message in terminal one because I subscribe the topic “#”. Also I should get the ack message also. But I can get nothing output. While the uplink message works well.

Does anyone know what’s the wrong with it?