-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 153
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Missing node will disable all children. #237
Comments
Nodes need to verify their connection periodically. If you look at the examples, you will see exactly this. I have my nodes checking their connection every 30 seconds, while the example verifies the connection whenever a write fails. You most likely have something wrong in your code, but this is not the place to debug your code, rather to report issues with the library. |
if i dont verify the connection nothing happens. After i try sending something it fails and tries to reconnect. Than it gets this weird address. Honestly i ran into memory issues a little later. It may be that. But if i understood correctly. If one of the nodes goes missing the library should handle reassigning new addresses to all of the missing nodes children. Is that correct ? |
The correct answer is no because you have to implement the connectivity handling in user code. See any of the examples and look at where RF24Mesh/examples/RF24Mesh_Example/RF24Mesh_Example.ino Lines 83 to 91 in 7c30deb
|
Hi, Im trying to implement this awesome library into my bachelor thesis.
I ran into an issue.
In this picture all is working fine.
Now I’m going to disable nodID:4
Children of nodeID:4 will not get a valid address.
All comunication fails. mesh.renewAddress() and mesh.begin(); doesnt help.
This persist until nodeID:4 is back online.
After nodeID:4 is back online. After some time, all is working fine.
But for me it’s quite a problem since losing a node is not an unrealistic problem.
Is this issue with my code or setup.
Or perhaps this scenario will not work?
Thank you, i can send code if anybody suggests that this should work fine but my code is at fault :)
Thank you very much for your work.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: