
Introducing Bluetooth Mesh Networking - tdrnd
https://blog.bluetooth.com/introducing-bluetooth-mesh-networking
======
crispyambulance
I don't know if bluetooth mesh will have the same problem, but zigbee as
implemented by Samsung Smartthings leaves a lot to be desired.

For one thing, there is no obvious way to inspect how "the mesh" is
configuring itself. I can't observe whether or not repeaters are working as
intended nor anything about the quality of the signal strength. The only way
to make changes to what gets connected to what is by turning everything off
and then turning it back on in a controlled sequence.

I hope that bluetooth mesh vendors will provide tools for troubleshooting and
actually inspecting network. Networks can be squirrely things, I don't like
taking a shot in the dark with this stuff.

~~~
mbell
Many Zigbee setups aren't actually mesh networks.

Zigbee defines only 3 device types:

1) Coordinator - Always on and the root of the network. Only 1 per network.

2) Router - Always on, can forward data from other nodes and send it's own
data.

3) End Device - Can sleep, can _not_ forward data from other devices.

In practice with something like SmartThings, the hub is the coordinator and
you can assume than any device which has a battery is an End Device since
routers are required to always be on. _Some_ wired Zigbee devices (like light
switches) will act as routers, but I've found they usually don't advertise if
they do or not.

For many people, all their devices are battery powered thus they have no
routers so there is no mesh at all, every end device must talk to the
controller in this setup.

------
joelthelion
How about introducing reliable bluetooth instead?

~~~
Paul_S
It's reliable, you just need to use an rf cable.

~~~
wolfgke
> It's reliable, you just need to use an rf cable.

This reminds me of a German engineering wise saying: "Wer Funk verstanden hat,
nimmt Kabel" ("Those who have understood wireless use a cable.").

------
LyalinDotCom
I just want my wireless BT headphones to work right across multiple devices,
can they fix that too?

~~~
Kayou
My Bose headphones can be connected to two devices simultaneously, and paired
to more devices (I don't know the limitation for pairing). Same for my 40$
bluetooth speaker.

~~~
akhatri_aus
Do your Bose headphones randomly cut off in an not so crowded office? Then
when your laptop can't see them, does it start playing music over the speakers
quite embarrassingly?

~~~
spike021
Not sure why this is downvoted.

This happens to me, but usually with my phone on the train; happened this
morning, in fact.

But it's also happened with other brands so it's not limited to Bose.

Which would mean it's a Bluetooth issue.

~~~
baldfat
I have been exclusively been using bluetooth headphones for over 6 years in a
city. I have never experienced any of those issues. I ride the bus and live in
have a high population density neighborhood. I work in a building with over
300 workers and haven't had a single incident like that.

~~~
bdamm
Any particular vendor?

~~~
baldfat
LG Neck Bands and GoNovate

GoNovate G10 is the smallest bluetooth that sits in your ear like a hearing
aid. I LOVE IT.

------
tenryuu
With mesh network being shipped, I hope there is now time to develop an
improvement to how bluetooth can be implemented into applications to allow
better UX in handling connections/handshakes. It's fine when you only use one
device, but when you start using two, man it's not user friendly

------
joombaga
This is a standard press release. Can someone tell me what this technology
actually is/does? Is it a bluetooth profile? A new protocol? At what layer? Is
it a new spec/new optional/addition to the spec? Does it require new hardware?

~~~
yaantc
All the details in the spec: [https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/mesh-
specifications](https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/mesh-specifications)

I'm not following this too closely, but here's the summary as I understand it:
it's a software evolution based on existing BLE hardware. It's not a new
profile, they're above the connectivity layer. Most important "detail" IMHO:
it's just the first step of BT mesh. This version 1.0 is based on flooding, so
not super efficient. Take all the pictures with a gazillion devices with a big
grain of salt ;) But an extension with routing, allowing better scaling, will
follow soon. Then it will have the potential to scale better. But this first
version is enough to get started, and sufficient for limited scale deployments
like consumer applications at home for example.

~~~
oflannabhra
This is correct. Several private companies built their own mesh networking
protocols on top of Bluetooth, and multiple silicon vendors also offered their
own mesh technology built into their stacks. If I recall correctly, one
company essentially donated their mesh networking protocol to the BT SIG, and
this became the basis for the official BT mesh. Within the SIG, there are
multiple efforts to bring mesh networking to the standard, through various
workgroups.

I think most of this is a response to 802.15.4 meshes, which have been around
for a long time, but are officially getting formalized into specifications or
product offerings. Thread, Zigbee, Z-Wave are all gaining momentum, and the BT
SIG is trying to not lose marketshare to these products.

Interestingly, Thread is the only mesh network of those I mentioned that
supports IP, through 6LoWPAN.

~~~
anonymousDan
Interesting. I'm in the middle of running some experiments on top of an ad-hoc
network of raspberry pis connected over WiFi. I next wanted to evaluate the
Java-based distributed system I've created on top of some kind of other mesh
networking technology (e.g. ZigBee, Bluetooth, Thread, Z-wave). I was hoping
to simply treat these as layer 2 technologies for which I could buy a
corresponding dongle for my Pis and use OLSR on the Pis to control the
routing. Do you mean to say they all define their own network and transport
layers? Ideally I'd just like to be able to open a TCP socket without having
to worry about the underlying mesh network implementation.

~~~
oflannabhra
Yes, ZigBee, Bluetooth, Thread, and Z-Wave all define their own network and
transport layers. ZigBee and Thread are built on top of the 802.15.4 PHY and
MAC standard, Bluetooth operates in the 2.4MHz frequency band and operates on
the 802.15.1 PHY and MAC (or did at one time), and Z-Wave operates in subGig
frequencies and implements its own PHY and MAC layer (plus all other OSI
layers). Opening a TCP socket across any of these is essentially impossible
because of the miniscule frames all of these support. Thread is the only one
that is even capable of supporting IP, but it does so over UDP, using 6LoWPAN
(basically IPv6 header compression and packet fragmentation).

Z-Wave, Bluetooth and Zigbee are full-stack, meaning they implement their own
application layers as well, so unless you implemented TCP on top of the
application layer, you probably won't get what you are looking for. Thread
just provides the networking layer, so you could potentially use it to carry
whatever traffic you like.

~~~
anonymousDan
Great info, thanks. Tallies with what I've read over the last few days. If I
understand correctly, Bluetooth provides RFCOMM as a reliable transport
protocol. Could I just use this in place of TCP for point to point connections
or does it have major limitations? I guess I'd have to change my endpoint
addressing given there is no IP obviously.

------
guidefreitas
And I still can't use my Bluetooth mouse and headset at same time reliably on
the MacBook pro. How can I trust that?

~~~
reaperducer
Hmmm... I'm able to use my BT headset, Apple trackpad, third-party keyboard,
and an old SonyEricsson mc600 all on the same MacBook Air with zero problems,
other than the appallingly short battery life in the (now retired) trackpad.
This is immediately next to an iMac with Apple BT keyboard and Apple BT mouse,
again with zero problems.

Is it possible there's something else in your environment interfering with the
BT signal? Perhaps an office with lots of other BT connections?

~~~
wolfgke
> Is it possible there's something else in your environment interfering with
> the BT signal? Perhaps an office with lots of other BT connections?

Bluetooth uses the frequency range between 2,402 GHz and 2,480 GHz. This is in
the ISM band that is also used by Wi-Fi. Indeed according to the German
Wikipedia article on Bluetooth (I could not find such a remark in the article
in the English wikipedia)

>
> [https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bluetooth&oldid=1...](https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bluetooth&oldid=167423313#Technischer_Hintergrund)

Bluetooth can be disrupted by Wi-Fi, microwave ovens and cordless phones (but
not by cordless phones using the DECT standard as is common in Germany).

------
reaperducer
Why "introducing?" There are already products on the market that have this.
Most of the lightbulbs in my house operate on a Bluetooth mesh network. It's
slower than the wifi-connected bulbs, but the range is much greater since each
bulb only needs to be able to see the next-nearest bulb. Otherwise I wouldn't
be able to reach the lights out on the driveway.

~~~
auchenberg
I doubt they use Bluetooth Mesh, but more like using BLE - Bluetooth Low
Energy.

~~~
stingrae
Bluetooth Mesh is built on BLE. The proprietary meshes that existed before the
standard was released also were flood mainly flood meshes on BLE.

------
iampims
I found the FAQ to be a good introduction document to the new mesh networking
feature.

[https://www.bluetooth.com/what-is-bluetooth-
technology/how-i...](https://www.bluetooth.com/what-is-bluetooth-
technology/how-it-works/le-mesh/mesh-faq)

~~~
peterwwillis
Thanks for the link. This explains why they would use low power devices with
an m:m flood network:

 _" Bluetooth technology implements a managed flood approach in which only
main-powered nodes serve as message relays. Low-power nodes, such as battery-
powered sensors, are not responsible for message relay." [...] "Bluetooth mesh
handles multicast communications using a publish/subscribe group messaging
approach. [...] Bluetooth mesh also supports virtual addresses, which extend
group addresses by allowing a 128-bit UUID to act as the destination
address."_

They also seem to have added strong security guarantees. So in theory, they
could control a large number of sensors using a small number of relays, and
have fine-grained, secure control over the low-power devices, and avoid
complex routing. It's honestly not a bad idea.

Now let's see if they fuck it up like all the other BT implementations.

------
donpdonp
It'd be interesting to see how this compares to scatternet that has been part
of bluetooth since 1.0.

~~~
digi_owl
I guess the idea here is that it will be self-configuring.

So if a central node in the network goes down, the rest of the mesh will
reconfigure their connections without human involvement.

And thanks for reminding me of the term, i had a feel something like this was
already in Bluetooth from the early days.

------
snvzz
Permit me to be skeptic when anybody claims

>A Proven, Trusted Technology

When talking about mesh networking.

~~~
bdamm
Some mesh networking technology is proven and trusted, carrying billions of
transactions per day. Disclaimer: I work for mesh networking vendor SSNI, and
we've been producing and operating large-scale reliable mesh networks for over
ten years now.

It is not easy to do well, though, and there are more failed attempts than
successes at this point.

------
VikingCoder
So how will me and my friends take advantage of this?

Will we have to wait for new hardware that supports it?

Or will we be able to update drivers on our Android phones, and then it'll
just work?

