Reply to post: O RLY?

O RLY?

I have no idea how well or poorly BT5 / mesh performs in practice, but I do have some extensive experience with another competing wireless standard implemented along all those same principles as described in the article, and boy do they suck mightily in practice. "Only non-battery nodes route" sounds good until you realise 95% of your network consists of battery powered sensors and portable remotes, all of which sleep all of the time meaning you can never read anything from them when you need a current value, you can never change any parameter because it will take hours or days to propagate, and your "mesh" doesn't even qualify as a daisy-chain because too few mains nodes (so you end up installing wall plugs and such you don't even want, just as relays). Oh and you're never supposed to move those, because that would screw up the routing table, and repairing that takes so long due to all the sleeping and meshing that it tends to get scheduled as an overnight operation that by the way doesn't even happen unless the controlling software stack requests it.

Of course, as mentioned, none of this is about Bluetooth - it's possible they somehow miraculously managed to avoid all the same pitfalls everyone else keeps being forced into by the laws of physics and constrained power sources. Who knows, maybe it's positively brilliant...