Mobile hex coverage limit

[heatedlime]

This Helium Improvement Proposal (HIP) suggests adding a hex multiplier score to the MOBILE Proof-of-Coverage (PoC) Modeled Coverage points based on whether other coverage from Helium 5G deployments exist within that res12 hex.

[samgutentag]

this looks solid so far! two quick questions/ideas:

1. include a note on how indoor radios are fit into the ranking/scoring
2. is the goal to maximize "modeled coverage points" or "coverage"

its great to drive for more points, but the network should focus on expanding coverage know the modeled coverage points will follow, rather than the other way around

[vincenzospaghetti]

You did not need to submit a new PR but no worries :) - Github can be confusing!
I'll take this as your most up-to-date PR. If you want to make changes to this branch, try just navigating to "Files Changed" and clicking the 3 dots button > edit file. I've found that's the easiest way to make changes. This will allow you to edit the file associated with this PR.

[heatedlime]

this looks solid so far! two quick questions/ideas:

1. include a note on how indoor radios are fit into the ranking/scoring
2. is the goal to maximize "modeled coverage points" or "coverage"

its great to drive for more points, but the network should focus on expanding coverage know the modeled coverage points will follow, rather than the other way around

For #1, indoor radios to not apply, and the current way they earn model coverage points noted in HIP 74 will still apply. This is only for outdoor radios.
For #2, the goal is to maximize coverage, and in doing so, the radio owner will earn more modeled coverage points. The only way to earn more modeled coverage points, is to provide better, less redundant coverage.

[heatedlime]

@vincenzospaghetti @samgutentag i've addressed all comments, and even sent this HIP to Boris, and he provided comments, which I've implemented into the HIP. This HIP concept is going to be presented at the next POC Working group on thursday, so I may have some minor edits after then.

[vincenzospaghetti]

That is so great! I'll leave it here as a PR until Thursday to let you get in any more edits. After that, I don't see anything standing in the way of getting this numbered and open for discussion. Great work!

[heatedlime]

That is so great! I'll leave it here as a PR until Thursday to let you get in any more edits. After that, I don't see anything standing in the way of getting this numbered and open for discussion. Great work!

@vincenzospaghetti @samgutentag Any further considerations from the Mobile working group have been added, and Boris said this is ready for the next step. Can you please give it one last final review and let me know if I need to do anything else?

[hiptron]

Hi @heatedlime can you see the points I've left in the document - some areas need some additional clarification.

In Summary:

• - Anything more you can say about the impact this HIP will have on the mobile network?
• - Provide a clearer explanation of the example table and its implications.
  (I've added some bullet points to for you to fill in. Assume a reader doesn't know what these categories are and needs more information to follow your example)
• - Emphasize the potential drawbacks and complexity of the proposal a bit more.
• - Include a suggestion for an alternative approach to address the issue.
  (What you have now is basically the alternative is what we have already, HIP 74, but that doesn't address the problem you're solving. Remind the reader of the problem of HIP 74, and suggest another alternative)