You are here


9 posts / 0 new
Last post
K3TEG's picture

It seems we have a conflict here... whether or not to use one or the other... BBHN is trying really hard to tell everyone by PM not to use AREDN and to consider them as spam and they're also telling us there will be legal actions to prevent AREDN from moving forward... 

With that said, I'm am at odds because I can see both Dev teams able to contribute to the MESH effort.  Both are operating under the GPL by using OpenWRT. So the squabbling must STOP NOW!  Both teams must come up with some sort of memorandum of understanding to keep the MESH project moving forward. We need complete standards to work with.  The Linux community already does this with the GPL, so if either one of the teams cannot play fair under the GPL, then the efforts of the MESH project stops.  I don't want to see this happen.  BBHN and AREDN need to work together... PERIOD!!! 

Figure it out people!  I don't like making choices because it causes a disconnect for the MESH project.  BBHN is NOT going anywhere so AREDN must put differences aside and find a way to work with BBHN and vice-versa! 

I will be putting the same message on their forum as well... I'm not the only one that feels this way, I'm getting all kinds of PMs and emails telling me the same thing... STOP THE SQUABBLING!!!  START WORKING TOGETHER!!!

Thank you and 73,

Tim Gelvin, K3TEG
ARES Emergency Coordinator
Northumberland County, PA


Hello Tim,

I would be glad to see both groups work together and my door is still open for the team out of Austin to talk if they so desire. As part of separating I even created additional build tools and additional build scripts for Austin so they could build their versions easier going forward.

Even if we remain separate I don't see it stopping development on either solution. As you mention the interface is GPL (GPLv3 to be precise) and is based on other GPL works as well (The kernel GPLv2 is a big one, OpenWRT building of the Kernel and GNU  also GPL.) This has an advantage  that both groups could, if they so desire, pull code from each other to continue with minimal effort. This ultimately means that the projects can grow stronger long term.  OpenWRT is a perfect example of this, it has become a dedicated operating system for embedded routers.

I won't be telling anyone they have to stop using BBHN or they have to use AREDN™. That is each persons choice and is up to them to make the decisions they want. At the moment they are virtually identical and to my knowledge fully compatible with each other.

You mentioned the threat of legal action, that is a large part of why the group had to rebrand. I was willing at the time to work as BBHNDev as a fully autonomous sub group that would continue to produce images directly for but the legal threats made that near impossible and burned a lot of good will with myself and my fellow developers (those whom have actually written code and provided user support and beta testing since version 1.0.1)

I was hopeful it would not come to this but sadly it has, that doesn't meant it can't roll back given the right conditions however.

Right now we are focusing on going forward, we have plans to continue developing, our focus strongly based on making sure each feature we add and the toolset we build in provides the tools Amateur Radio Operators need for strong reliable networks that help them develop the presence they need for their local users.  Nothing (to my knowledge) from our side will stop our features and code changes we add going forward from being used in BBHN if they wish to.


Best Regards,
Conrad Lara
Coder of BBHN Firmware version 1.0.1 through 3.0.0 and the 3.0.1 unofficial build(code base for 3.1.0)
Member AREDN™ Dev Team

NOTE: This is my personal opinion should not be taken as an official response of the AREDN™  team.

Edit Notes:
Edited for spelling/grammer and added disclaimer that this is my personal opinion.

K3TEG's picture
Jim said he'd be willing to

Jim said he'd be willing to work with you, BUT he's really mad because that you took emails for a your purposes... yes I got one of those emails.  However, I do feel you need to fix this issue with Jim Kinter... maybe a simple apology and a promise / memorandum of understanding can help the MESH effort move forward.  Either way, you need to fix this and make it right!

I am not really sure what is

I am not really sure what is being implied or if there is just a gap because of a 3rd person being involved. I can say that in response to "BUT he's really mad because that you took emails for a your purposes" that I took no email addresses from BBHN, nor would I (I'm not even aware of a location on the site that published email address)

I would rather not place you in the awkard position of having to be a middle man  so I can say it is probably just best that Jim contacts the AREDN™ group direct if he has concerns as I have heard nothing from him direct.


Interoperability concerns

Personally, I am just concerned about future interoperability issues.  After having had to reflash every single node I own and nodes belonging to friends several times in the past few months and putting up nodes at repeater sites, the idea of new versions coming down the pipe scares me...


I even harrassed one guy to fly to France to upgrade HIS nodes so he could tunnel with me!  And he DID!  Now THAT is dedication!


I don't want to see dedication like that go un-rewarded...  I don't want to have to reflash, from scratch, every single node I own every few months.  I don't want to have to harass my friends to do so either.  Plane tickets home to France aren't cheap!  LOL


I want to build my local mesh so we can all play with our toys...  Not worry about whether or not to pick VHS or Beta again...


That's just my .02 cents...


The bright side of all this is I picked up my old Linux books and dusted them off...  I have some learning to do.  I am not going to let personality conflicts get in the way of our EMCOMM strategy down here in Texas.  You guys had a great idea, you have done some great work but it is up to the user community to make it useful to the rest of us guys who want to make a big picture actually work.  Without repeaters, all those VHF/UHF guys wouldn't be talking very far, or often.  The wider mesh will bring us things we can't envision right now.  Things have changed a lot since vacuum tubes and HF.  The mesh on microwaves is a new tool to be used...  Not squabbled over like VHS and Beta.


We all just want mesh networking to WORK...  :)  That's all...


Bill - N5MBM

K5DLQ's picture
What squabble??

The way I see it is that, in order to stop the previous squabbling, AREDN simply forked the project and is proceeding to advance the mesh.

Let's get back to work and innovate!

Squable Dable it's all open source. Get over it.

I think both teams should support each other and move the art forward. I believe a good mission statement for AREDN would be to continue advancing the software and art of the mesh but only support newer ubiqity devices and other future hardware that allows us to use more features of state of the art hardware. I hate to say it because I've invested a lot in the linksys devices in the past, but it's time to drop that baggage and move forward with state of the art hardware and software that can make full use of it, without having to worry about compatability for the older equipment. Maybe that is what AREDN
should be. Just my two cents for what its worth.

KF7PSM - Trying to mesh in Las Vegas.

K6AH's picture
AREDN Mission

Well Peter, you could not have stated our mission more susinctly.  We do not support the Linksys gear, and to the extent our RF messaging protocols remain compatible... we direct people to BBHN for that.

Also, anyone can grab our source code and advance it as they see fit.  Last I heard, BBHN was getting a sync'd copy of our entire code repository nightly.

Andre, K6AH

So what's it about?

I'm a newcomer to this project, though I'm hardly a newcomer to networking. I'm trying to figure out what's going on, and I don't like what I see. I could be wrong, but I don't get the impression that BBHN or AREDN is widely used beyond its developer community. If so, forks and infighting are probably the best way to keep it that way.

Yes, forking is sometimes unavoidable when two groups realize that they have different and incompatible technical goals. Ideally, they amicably agree to part ways but to cooperate when possible, and even to re-join if the technical issues can be solved to everyone's satisfaction. But I haven't even been able to figure out what those issues are, much less why they necessitated a project split. Or even a SSID change.


Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer