I appreciate all of your efforts! If nothing else, I at least know where the problem is now. Standing by for a response from the devs.
I will do that now.
Did you hear anything suggested by staff?
Geese, I've always believed the opposite so included without whenever possible. You have me rethinking my entire network!?!
There are pros and cons either way. S2 does verify each packet, so if you need to have retransmits due to mesh issues or a flaky device sometimes S2 will be more reliable.
On the other hand if you are having mesh issues or a flaky device they can be exacerbated by S2 as well because of the additional traffic.
2 Likes
Yep, that's it in a nutshell. S2 definitely needs a decent mesh to begin with, or you'll just be straining it more.
In my case, I have some devices that fluctuate between a 100 - 40 kbps connection (due to distance or difficult positioning [leak sensors]), so when those flit down to 40, I appreciate knowing their packets are still solid with S2.
Ack, meant to reply in general - response not targeted at JasonJoel in particular - I know he already knows all this
1 Like
This is partially the reason that LR devices are always S2. Reliability of transmission.
And obviously on those devices there's no mesh to consider, so there's no downside on LR devices.
The other reason LR requires S2 is just marketing fluff. "Encrypted is better than non-encrypted"... 
2 Likes
Sorry for delays. Looks like we have escalated your case and is still under research. Will follow up on your case tomorrow and will send you an update. Thanks for your patience.
Excellent! Thank you for getting back to me. I will be standing by.
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
