Skip to content
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

[Bug]: T114 can't send messages longer than 47 chars #4723

Closed
adingbatponder opened this issue Sep 15, 2024 · 194 comments
Closed

[Bug]: T114 can't send messages longer than 47 chars #4723

adingbatponder opened this issue Sep 15, 2024 · 194 comments
Labels
hardware cantfix Hardware problem, can't be fixed

Comments

@adingbatponder
Copy link

Category

Other

Hardware

Heltec Mesh Node T114

Firmware Version

2.4.3.91d6612

Description

Messages above 47 characters cannot be sent. Other are reporting that the message length that causes failure to send is variable https://www.reddit.com/r/meshtastic/comments/1fhc47k/heltec_t114_message_sending_bugfault

Relevant log output

No response

@adingbatponder adingbatponder added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 15, 2024
@adingbatponder
Copy link
Author

@adingbatponder
Copy link
Author

Does it forward packets normally or are certain length messages not forwarded?

@meshtastic-bot
Copy link

This issue has been mentioned on Meshtastic. There might be relevant details there:

https://meshtastic.discourse.group/t/t114-fails-to-send-messages-above-certain-length/14719/1

@GUVWAF
Copy link
Member

GUVWAF commented Sep 15, 2024

Can you try setting a lower transmit power (e.g. 3 dBm) and see if the issue persists?

I'm trying to figure out if it's a hardware issue (e.g. unstable power supply or EMC issues) or something else.

@fifieldt fifieldt changed the title [Bug]: [Bug]: T114 can't send messages longer than 47 chars Sep 16, 2024
@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Sep 16, 2024

Lowering the transmit power to 3 dbm did the trick! it transmitted for me from one T114 to another (DM), longfast.
3dbm --> success
5dbm-->success
7dbm--> success but slight delay
8dbm--> failure
10dbm-->failure
But even with the 3db setting I was not able to successfully send a max length/characters message.

@willfootwill
Copy link

exact same behaviour here - ok below 8db

@willfootwill
Copy link

I tried going back to earlier firmware 2.4.xxx, no improvement

@lupusworax
Copy link

I am on 2.5 most recent release. If this issue is hardware based its bad, really bad!! because how I see it now every T114 so far is affected.

@NeilMartin
Copy link

My T114 is running 2.4.2 and I just sent a 71 character message to LongFast. Received successfully on my T-Deck (2.4.2).

@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Sep 16, 2024

Also tested to send from my T114 ( stock 27dbm) to my Heltec V3 a much longer message then 71 (150) successfully 3 times out of 4. #longfast DM

@DTopp
Copy link

DTopp commented Sep 17, 2024

Today at 27dBm I can send around 60 character messages, up to 30 characters no problem after that I had to resend a couple of messages.

At 3dBm I'm managing to send 200 character messages (stopped there as I wasn't sure what the limit is) and they've been getting through no problem.

@aljaxus
Copy link

aljaxus commented Sep 17, 2024

can send 144-char (base64 encoded, and 107-char decoded) messages with tx_power set to 5. (more info in reddit reply)
Same message was not reliably sent when having tx_power set to 27. Will test further and update this reply as I go.

@thebentern
Copy link
Contributor

Thinking out loud... Given this symptom combined with some of the sporadic BLE issues, I wonder if we're looking at some hardware level issues with the LDO converter not being able to supply enough current to the MCU + peripherals under certain loads.

@lupusworax
Copy link

Would a big enough capacitor at the LDO be able to buffer that?

@thebentern
Copy link
Contributor

Would a big enough capacitor at the LDO be able to buffer that?

Potentially. If someone is willing to sacrifice hardware modifications in the name of science, we can find out. 😅

@fifieldt
Copy link
Contributor

fifieldt commented Sep 17, 2024

Q) Does everyone above have the version with a screen? GPS?

@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Sep 17, 2024

Screen+ GPS and Screen no GPS but lots of other added stuff like vibra, buzzer ( both fired by a mosfet feeded directly from the 3.3volt rail) and a smd LED but that barely falls into weight as that stuff only fires up when receiving a message.
I have to retry with a unmodified T114 as well when I get home but I am pretty sure it will be the same outcome pretty much.
One thing I also noticed is that the screen dims slightly whenever a message is sent.

@DTopp
Copy link

DTopp commented Sep 17, 2024

Q) Does everyone above have the version with a screen? GPS?

Screen and GPS.

@NeilMartin
Copy link

NeilMartin commented Sep 17, 2024 via email

@todd-herbert
Copy link
Contributor

todd-herbert commented Sep 17, 2024

Thinking out loud... Given this symptom combined with some of the sporadic BLE issues, I wonder if we're looking at some hardware level issues with the LDO converter not being able to supply enough current to the MCU + peripherals under certain loads.

I would have suspected the same thing, but I've got it on the scope right now though and I can't measure any significant dip in voltage when transmitting. This was with screen only, powered by USB. I'll connect the GPS and see if it changes.

Update: no change with GPS. Drawing ~150mA from 5V supply when transmitting. To my untrained eye, the 3.3V looks pretty solid, at least on my device.

Update 2: I'm actually having trouble replicating the issue at all, so my report might not be that helpful. Long DM's seem to be going through fine for me right now. Could be good to get some observations instead from devices which are struggling.

This is with tonight's master (a967dd5)

@fifieldt
Copy link
Contributor

fifieldt commented Sep 18, 2024

I've managed to reproduce on a T114 no GPS and no screen. So it looks like those are not factors.

Current master (2024-09-18).

logs:

DEBUG | 02:07:24 465 [Router] Module 'routing' considered

INFO | 02:07:24 465 Telling client we have new packets 45

INFO | 02:07:24 465 BLE notify fromNum

INFO | 02:07:24 465 getFromRadio=STATE_SEND_PACKETS

DEBUG | 02:07:24 465 phone downloaded packet (id=0xff6785a8 fr=0x3f to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=5 requestId=216334ae rxtime=1726625244 priority=120)

DEBUG | 02:07:24 465 [Power] Battery: usbPower=0, isCharging=0, batMv=3973, batPct=78

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=52, time 624 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x3067a0f4 fr=0x48 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-92 hopStart=7)

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 624ms

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x335c2d48,to=0xffffffff,id=0x3067a0f4

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x335c2d48,to=0xffffffff,id=0x3067a0f4

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x3067a0f4 fr=0x48 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-92 hopStart=7)

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [Router] Ignoring incoming msg we've already seen (id=0x3067a0f4 fr=0x48 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-92 hopStart=7)

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [Router] cancelSending id=0x3067a0f4, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:25 466 [Router] Incoming message was filtered from 0x335c2d48

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=52, time 624 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x3067a0f4 fr=0x48 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-32 hopStart=7)

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 624ms

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x335c2d48,to=0xffffffff,id=0x3067a0f4

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x335c2d48,to=0xffffffff,id=0x3067a0f4

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x3067a0f4 fr=0x48 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-32 hopStart=7)

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [Router] Ignoring incoming msg we've already seen (id=0x3067a0f4 fr=0x48 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-32 hopStart=7)

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [Router] cancelSending id=0x3067a0f4, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:27 468 [Router] Incoming message was filtered from 0x335c2d48

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=98, time 968 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=4 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-31 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 968ms

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=4 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-31 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Using channel 0 (hash 0x8)

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Expanding short PSK #1

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Using AES128 key!

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] decoded message (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=4 WANTRESP rxtime=1726625248 rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-31 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] handleReceived(REMOTE) (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=4 WANTRESP rxtime=1726625248 rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-31 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Module 'nodeinfo' wantsPacket=1

INFO | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Received nodeinfo from=0x433b830c, id=0x3feb7e38, portnum=4, payloadlen=74

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] old user TWMesh 830c/TW83, channel=0

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Incoming Pubkey: : 50 11 a3 bc 3a 5a dd 04 e9 65 d1 d3 cd 83 c7 03 bd b9 f9 35 7f 73 9b 80 ad 79 0f 9d d3 3e 51 2c 

INFO | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Public Key set for node, not updating!

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Saved Pubkey: : 50 11 a3 bc 3a 5a dd 04 e9 65 d1 d3 cd 83 c7 03 bd b9 f9 35 7f 73 9b 80 ad 79 0f 9d d3 3e 51 2c 

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] updating changed=0 user TWMesh 830c/TW83, channel=0

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Module 'nodeinfo' considered

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Module 'routing' wantsPacket=1

INFO | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Received routing from=0x433b830c, id=0x3feb7e38, portnum=4, payloadlen=74

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Routing sniffing (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=4 WANTRESP rxtime=1726625248 rxSNR=7 rxRSSI=-31 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Not rebroadcasting. Role = Role_ClientMute

DEBUG | 02:07:28 469 [Router] Module 'routing' considered

INFO | 02:07:29 470 [DeviceTelemetryModule] (Sending): air_util_tx=0.159861, channel_utilization=17.653332, battery_level=78, voltage=3.973000, uptime=470

DEBUG | 02:07:29 470 [DeviceTelemetryModule] Partially randomized packet id 2912681385

DEBUG | 02:07:29 470 [DeviceTelemetryModule] updateTelemetry LOCAL

DEBUG | 02:07:29 470 [DeviceTelemetryModule] Node status update: 8 online, 42 total

INFO | 02:07:29 470 [DeviceTelemetryModule] Sending packet to phone

INFO | 02:07:29 470 Telling client we have new packets 46

INFO | 02:07:29 470 BLE notify fromNum

INFO | 02:07:29 470 getFromRadio=STATE_SEND_PACKETS

DEBUG | 02:07:29 470 phone downloaded packet (id=0xad9bfda9 fr=0x3f to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=67 rxtime=1726625249 priority=10)

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=96, time 952 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=3 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=2.25 rxRSSI=-93 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 952ms

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x433b830c,to=0x335c2d48,id=0x3feb7e38

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x433b830c,to=0x335c2d48,id=0x3feb7e38

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=3 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=2.25 rxRSSI=-93 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [Router] Ignoring incoming msg we've already seen (id=0x3feb7e38 fr=0x0c to=0x48, WantAck=0, HopLim=3 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=2.25 rxRSSI=-93 hopStart=4)

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [Router] cancelSending id=0x3feb7e38, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:31 472 [Router] Incoming message was filtered from 0x433b830c

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=54, time 641 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 641ms

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Using channel 0 (hash 0x8)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Expanding short PSK #1

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Using AES128 key!

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] decoded message (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625257 rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] handleReceived(REMOTE) (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625257 rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Module 'position' wantsPacket=1

INFO | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Received position from=0x33686c24, id=0x5d17b792, portnum=3, payloadlen=34

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] POSITION node=33686c24 l=34 lat=250125571 lon=1214676538 msl=52 hae=0 geo=0 pdop=179 hdop=0 vdop=0 siv=10 fxq=0 fxt=0 pts=1726625257 time=1726625255

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Ignoring time from mesh because we have a GPS, RTC, or Phone/NTP time source in the past day

INFO | 02:07:37 478 [Router] updatePosition REMOTE node=0x33686c24 time=1726625255 lat=250125571 lon=1214676538

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Node status update: 8 online, 42 total

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Module 'position' considered

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Module 'routing' wantsPacket=1

INFO | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Received routing from=0x33686c24, id=0x5d17b792, portnum=3, payloadlen=34

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Routing sniffing (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625257 rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Not rebroadcasting. Role = Role_ClientMute

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Delivering rx packet (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625257 rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Update DB node 0x33686c24, rx_time=1726625257

INFO | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Heard a node on channel 0 we don't know, sending NodeInfo and asking for a response.

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] cancelSending id=0xd1b0f1a4, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Skip sending NodeInfo since we just sent it less than 5 minutes ago.

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Forwarding to phone (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625257 rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 [Router] Module 'routing' considered

INFO | 02:07:37 478 Telling client we have new packets 47

INFO | 02:07:37 478 BLE notify fromNum

INFO | 02:07:37 478 getFromRadio=STATE_SEND_PACKETS

DEBUG | 02:07:37 478 phone downloaded packet (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625257 rxSNR=-19.75 rxRSSI=-116 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=54, time 641 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 641ms

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x33686c24,to=0xffffffff,id=0x5d17b792

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x33686c24,to=0xffffffff,id=0x5d17b792

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [Router] Ignoring incoming msg we've already seen (id=0x5d17b792 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [Router] cancelSending id=0x5d17b792, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:39 479 [Router] Incoming message was filtered from 0x33686c24

WARN | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] Couldn't publish a valid location: didn't get a GPS lock in time.

DEBUG | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] Took 60s to get lock

DEBUG | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] Predicting 60s to get next lock

DEBUG | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] 0s until next search

INFO | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] GPS power state moving from ACTIVE to IDLE

DEBUG | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] publishing pos@0:2, hasVal=0, Sats=0, GPSlock=0

DEBUG | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] onGPSChanged() pos@0 time=1726625259 lat=0 lon=0 alt=0

INFO | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] updatePosition LOCAL pos@0 time=1726625259 lat=0 lon=0 alt=0

DEBUG | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] Setting local position: lat=0 lon=0 time=1726625259 timestamp=0

DEBUG | 02:07:39 480 [GPS] Node status update: 9 online, 42 total

INFO | 02:07:43 484 toRadioWriteCb data 0x20016b0a, len 68

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 PACKET FROM PHONE (id=0x216334b0 fr=0x00 to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=0 Ch=0x0 Portnum=1)

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 localSend to channel 0

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=68, time 739 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 Setting next retransmission in 8596 msecs:  (id=0x216334b0 fr=0x00 to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=1 rxtime=1726625263)

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 Add packet record (id=0x216334b0 fr=0x00 to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=1 rxtime=1726625263)

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 Expanding short PSK #1

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 Using AES128 key!

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 enqueuing for send (id=0x216334b0 fr=0x3f to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=4 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxtime=1726625263 hopStart=4 priority=100)

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 txGood=7,rxGood=78,rxBad=3

INFO | 02:07:43 484 Telling client we have new packets 48

INFO | 02:07:43 484 BLE notify fromNum

INFO | 02:07:43 484 getFromRadio=STATE_SEND_PACKETS

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 [RadioIf] Starting low level send (id=0x216334b0 fr=0x3f to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=4 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxtime=1726625263 hopStart=4 priority=100)

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=70, time 755 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:43 484 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet transmitted : 755ms

DEBUG | 02:07:44 485 [RadioIf] Completed sending (id=0x216334b0 fr=0x3f to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=4 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxtime=1726625263 hopStart=4 priority=100)

INFO | 02:07:44 485 [GPS] GPS power state moving from IDLE to ACTIVE

DEBUG | 02:07:44 485 [Power] Battery: usbPower=0, isCharging=0, batMv=3949, batPct=75

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=27, time 436 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 436ms

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=27, time 436 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Add packet record (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Using channel 0 (hash 0x8)

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Expanding short PSK #1

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Using AES128 key!

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] decoded message (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=5 requestId=216334b0 rxtime=1726625265 rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] handleReceived(REMOTE) (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=5 requestId=216334b0 rxtime=1726625265 rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=2

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Module 'routing' wantsPacket=1

INFO | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Received routing from=0x1499a87, id=0xe56aa9b4, portnum=5, payloadlen=2

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Routing sniffing (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=5 requestId=216334b0 rxtime=1726625265 rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Received an ack for 0x216334b0, stopping retransmissions

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Delivering rx packet (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=5 requestId=216334b0 rxtime=1726625265 rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Update DB node 0x1499a87, rx_time=1726625265

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Forwarding to phone (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=5 requestId=216334b0 rxtime=1726625265 rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 [Router] Module 'routing' considered

INFO | 02:07:45 486 Telling client we have new packets 49

INFO | 02:07:45 486 BLE notify fromNum

INFO | 02:07:45 486 getFromRadio=STATE_SEND_PACKETS

DEBUG | 02:07:45 486 phone downloaded packet (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=5 requestId=216334b0 rxtime=1726625265 rxSNR=3 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=27, time 436 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=5.75 rxRSSI=-33 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 436ms

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x1499a87,to=0x59e4f83f,id=0xe56aa9b4

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x1499a87,to=0x59e4f83f,id=0xe56aa9b4

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [Router] Add packet record (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=5.75 rxRSSI=-33 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [Router] Ignoring incoming msg we've already seen (id=0xe56aa9b4 fr=0x87 to=0x3f, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=5.75 rxRSSI=-33 hopStart=2)

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [Router] cancelSending id=0xe56aa9b4, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:46 486 [Router] Incoming message was filtered from 0x1499a87

DEBUG | 02:07:52 493 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=54, time 641 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:52 493 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:52 493 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 641ms

DEBUG | 02:07:52 493 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:52 493 [Router] Using channel 0 (hash 0x8)

DEBUG | 02:07:52 493 [Router] Expanding short PSK #1

DEBUG | 02:07:52 493 [Router] Using AES128 key!

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] decoded message (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625272 rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] handleReceived(REMOTE) (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625272 rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Module 'position' wantsPacket=1

INFO | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Received position from=0x33686c24, id=0x5d17b793, portnum=3, payloadlen=34

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] POSITION node=33686c24 l=34 lat=250125158 lon=1214674883 msl=84 hae=0 geo=0 pdop=217 hdop=0 vdop=0 siv=12 fxq=0 fxt=0 pts=1726625273 time=1726625271

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Ignoring time from mesh because we have a GPS, RTC, or Phone/NTP time source in the past day

INFO | 02:07:53 493 [Router] updatePosition REMOTE node=0x33686c24 time=1726625271 lat=250125158 lon=1214674883

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Node status update: 9 online, 42 total

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Module 'position' considered

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Module 'routing' wantsPacket=1

INFO | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Received routing from=0x33686c24, id=0x5d17b793, portnum=3, payloadlen=34

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Routing sniffing (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625272 rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Not rebroadcasting. Role = Role_ClientMute

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Delivering rx packet (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625272 rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Update DB node 0x33686c24, rx_time=1726625272

INFO | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Heard a node on channel 0 we don't know, sending NodeInfo and asking for a response.

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] cancelSending id=0xd1b0f1a4, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Skip sending NodeInfo since we just sent it less than 5 minutes ago.

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Forwarding to phone (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625272 rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 [Router] Module 'routing' considered

INFO | 02:07:53 493 Telling client we have new packets 50

INFO | 02:07:53 493 BLE notify fromNum

INFO | 02:07:53 493 getFromRadio=STATE_SEND_PACKETS

DEBUG | 02:07:53 493 phone downloaded packet (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=2 Ch=0x0 Portnum=3 rxtime=1726625272 rxSNR=-20 rxRSSI=-115 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [RadioIf] (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=54, time 641 ms

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [RadioIf] Lora RX (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3.25 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [RadioIf] AirTime - Packet received : 641ms

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x33686c24,to=0xffffffff,id=0x5d17b793

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [Router] Found existing packet record for fr=0x33686c24,to=0xffffffff,id=0x5d17b793

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [Router] Add packet record (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3.25 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [Router] Ignoring incoming msg we've already seen (id=0x5d17b793 fr=0x24 to=0xff, WantAck=0, HopLim=1 Ch=0x8 encrypted rxSNR=3.25 rxRSSI=-91 hopStart=3)

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [Router] cancelSending id=0x5d17b793, removed=0

DEBUG | 02:07:54 495 [Router] Incoming message was filtered from 0x33686c24

DEBUG | 02:08:04 505 [Power] Battery: usbPower=0, isCharging=0, batMv=3975, batPct=78

INFO | 02:08:14 515 toRadioWriteCb data 0x200236e8, len 257

DEBUG | 02:08:14 515 PACKET FROM PHONE (id=0x216334b1 fr=0x00 to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=0 Ch=0x0 Portnum=1)

DEBUG | 02:08:14 515 localSend to channel 0

DEBUG | 02:08:14 515 (bw=250, sf=11, cr=4/5) packet symLen=8 ms, payloadSize=255, time 2131 ms

DEBUG | 02:08:14 515 Setting next retransmission in 11380 msecs:  (id=0x216334b1 fr=0x00 to=0x87, WantAck=1, HopLim=4 Ch=0x0 Portnum=1 rxtime=1726625294)

DEBUG | 02:08:14 515 Add packet record (

@skylerwshaw
Copy link

@fifieldt Can you help break down what your debug logs here demonstrate? I'm a software dev, though new to Meshtastic as of a week. Aiming to run some tests at various dBm levels between a t114 and a control Wisblock node. Would love insight into what logs are indicating that could benefit my analysis outside of just looking at whether the message was received by the control node. Thanks!

@fifieldt
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @skylerwshaw , the only real interesting messages are the last 5.

We got a packet from the phone, plan to send it to lora channel 0, sent a 255 byte payload, then died after cleaning up and adding it to our list of sent packets. The half-printed line where it dies is from code that hasn't been changed in >6 months, so that's probably not the root of the problem.

@x81Reaper
Copy link

x81Reaper commented Sep 19, 2024

Hello dear community, it is definitely not a hardware issue. I have fixed it on 3 devices. How? nrf erase multiple times, firmware 2.5, then back to 2.4.2 then back to 2.5, deleted again and back to 2.4.2 and now I can send the full number of characters :)
Battery level over 90%

@DTopp
Copy link

DTopp commented Sep 19, 2024

Hello dear community, it is definitely not a hardware issue. I have fixed it on 3 devices. How? nrf erase multiple times, firmware 2.5, then back to 2.4.2 then back to 2.5, deleted again and back to 2.4.2 and now I can send the full number of characters :) Battery level over 90%

Couldn't get your method to work for me unfortunately although it did perform a little better than it has been.
Screenshot 2024-09-19 133723

@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Sep 19, 2024

Hello dear community, it is definitely not a hardware issue. I have fixed it on 3 devices. How? nrf erase multiple times, firmware 2.5, then back to 2.4.2 then back to 2.5, deleted again and back to 2.4.2 and now I can send the full number of characters :) Battery level over 90%

That sounds wild, there must be a better solution, thats like rolling some dice and hoping to get a pair at some point??

@s56oa
Copy link

s56oa commented Sep 19, 2024

Hello dear community, it is definitely not a hardware issue. I have fixed it on 3 devices. How? nrf erase multiple times, firmware 2.5, then back to 2.4.2 then back to 2.5, deleted again and back to 2.4.2 and now I can send the full number of characters :) Battery level over 90%

That sounds wild, there must be a better solution, thats like rolling some dice and hoping to get a pair at some point??

Sounds like some sort of timing issue?

My Heltec T114 has the same problem.
Tested with full length (228 bytes) messages. Super and dandy up to 10 dBm. Above this it gets into trouble.

@lupusworax
Copy link

Seems to be all over the place, I was not able to send larger messages above 7dBm with both of my T114s. Lowering dBm was in direct relation of being able to send bigger messages. The lower the dBm the more successful I was with bigger messages. Once I upped the dBm again step by step, message length decreased ( for a successful delivery)

@SirHumphreyAppleby
Copy link

SirHumphreyAppleby commented Oct 11, 2024

I would simply contact them over message and ask. I dont think they will send out old versions as heltec surely will avoid more bad publicity. Would be interesting what they are going to do with the old stock?

I did actually e-mail the address in the earlier post for confirmation, but I expect they are quite busy handling other queries. Since e-mailing, they updated their main site, but AliExpress is much cheaper for me (I don't have a 20% discount code - first order).

@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Oct 11, 2024

I would simply contact them over message and ask. I dont think they will send out old versions as heltec surely will avoid more bad publicity. Would be interesting what they are going to do with the old stock?

I did actually e-mail the address in the earlier post for confirmation, but I expect they are quite busy handling other queries. Since e-mailing, they updated their main site, but AliExpress is much cheaper for me (I don't have a 20% discount code - first order)

Please dont listen to next Gen 3D printings boot licking about being "ashamed" buying from an ali vendor xD I also buy all of my stuff on Ali express and not from muzi or any other middle man, its also cheaper for me and why would I go for something more expensive? You have all the right to buy it as cheap as possible so please dont justify your doing, its all good ;)

I am terribly sorry as I got it wrong I guess and ask for forgiveness bows his head down in shame

@SirHumphreyAppleby
Copy link

I receive a reply to my e-mail...

"Please the T114 is out of stock, the V2 will be available in this Month.
So please purchase from our store: www.heltec.org."

The product has also now been marked as unavailable on AliExpress. I assume that's because AliExpress expects sellers to ship within a certain time. I guess I'm waiting.

@NexGen-3D-Printing
Copy link

NexGen-3D-Printing commented Oct 11, 2024

I would simply contact them over message and ask. I dont think they will send out old versions as heltec surely will avoid more bad publicity. Would be interesting what they are going to do with the old stock?

I did actually e-mail the address in the earlier post for confirmation, but I expect they are quite busy handling other queries. Since e-mailing, they updated their main site, but AliExpress is much cheaper for me (I don't have a 20% discount code - first order)

Please dont listen to next Gen 3D printings boot licking about being "ashamed" buying from an ali vendor xD I also buy all of my stuff on Ali express and not from muzi or any other middle man, its also cheaper for me and why would I go for something more expensive? You have all the right to buy it as cheap as possible so please dont justify your doing, its all good ;)

WTF are you on about? don't put words in my mouth, I never said anything of the sort, I buy from there, I never said anything about being "ashamed" I'm referring to the 20% discount thing instead of a full replacement, as I have a few I purchased from Aliexpress.

"Ashamed" has a totally different meaning to a "shame", I was expressing my disappointment as I may not get my units replaced.

@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Oct 11, 2024

I would simply contact them over message and ask. I dont think they will send out old versions as heltec surely will avoid more bad publicity. Would be interesting what they are going to do with the old stock?

I did actually e-mail the address in the earlier post for confirmation, but I expect they are quite busy handling other queries. Since e-mailing, they updated their main site, but AliExpress is much cheaper for me (I don't have a 20% discount code - first order)

Please dont listen to next Gen 3D printings boot licking about being "ashamed" buying from an ali vendor xD I also buy all of my stuff on Ali express and not from muzi or any other middle man, its also cheaper for me and why would I go for something more expensive? You have all the right to buy it as cheap as possible so please dont justify your doing, its all good ;)

WTF are you on about? don't put words in my mouth, I never said anything of the sort, I buy from there, I never said anything about being "ashamed" I'm referring to the 20% discount thing instead of a full replacement, as I have a few I purchased from Aliexpress.

"Ashamed" has a totally different meaning to a "shame", I was expressing my disappointment as I may not get my units replaced.

I guess I got it wrong then, sorry for that, but you never said it in the context like you explained it now! the original message sounds nothing alike, you have to write things out how you mean it, I cant read thoughts man xD Also you totally gonna get them replaced! no matter if bought from heltec directly, Heltec on Ali or any other vendor selling the T114 on Ali or other platforms.

the 20% discount is just something additional for the trouble caused with the defective devices.

@NexGen-3D-Printing
Copy link

I guess I got it wrong then, sorry for that, but you never said it in the context like you explained it now! the original message sounds nothing alike, you have to write things out how you mean it, I cant read thoughts man xD Also you totally gonna get them replaced! no matter if bought from heltec directly, Heltec on Ali or any other vendor selling the T114 on Ali or other platforms.

the 20% discount is just something additional for the trouble caused with the defective devices.

All good, and it looks like I misunderstood them, I might contact the seller on Ali then, I wasn't going to if I was only getting 20% discount off the replacement :)

@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Oct 11, 2024

I guess I got it wrong then, sorry for that, but you never said it in the context like you explained it now! the original message sounds nothing alike, you have to write things out how you mean it, I cant read thoughts man xD Also you totally gonna get them replaced! no matter if bought from heltec directly, Heltec on Ali or any other vendor selling the T114 on Ali or other platforms.
the 20% discount is just something additional for the trouble caused with the defective devices.

All good, and it looks like I misunderstood them, I might contact the seller on Ali then, I wasn't going to if I was only getting 20% discount off the replacement :)

Na man I am absolutely certain you will see some shiny new Rev 2 boards being thrown through your door soon ;) I also contacted the reseller I got my boards from on ali and now its just about waiting until they get shipped.

The Only Issue I have is that I already built 8 nodes. 4 of them I havent tested yet, its like with schmidts cat, as long you dont check for known issues it works and also not xD. I put so many hours in the very complex builds and just thinking about that they suffer the same issue...........well I guess I am just gonna use them for "Display" options in my glass cabinet.

@Heltec-Aaron-Lee
Copy link
Contributor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGNeAgeDcaE

@Matvey-Kuk
Copy link

Hmmm, does Heltec support act weird with others as well? Ordered from the official Aliexpress store, sent three e-mails with order id to [email protected] and got this as a response 0_o
Screenshot 2024-10-17 at 17 57 47

@devzwf
Copy link

devzwf commented Oct 17, 2024

at least you get an answer ........

@jsnyder
Copy link

jsnyder commented Oct 17, 2024

Hmmm, does Heltec support act weird with others as well? Ordered from the official Aliexpress store, sent three e-mails with order id to [email protected] and got this as a response 0_o

Screenshot 2024-10-17 at 17 57 47

I have no reply yet. One email sent on the 10th and then resent today. I have however had emails from my personal domain get lost in a spam folder so I'll try sending from my gmail address next if this doesn't trigger a response.

@dahanc
Copy link
Contributor

dahanc commented Oct 17, 2024

I emailed them my order numbers on the 10th and got a reply the next day.

@spicebagger
Copy link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGNeAgeDcaE

Much respect for Heltec. Working with the customers, and being so transparent.❤️

@lupusworax
Copy link

Hmmm, does Heltec support act weird with others as well? Ordered from the official Aliexpress store, sent three e-mails with order id to [email protected] and got this as a response 0_o
Screenshot 2024-10-17 at 17 57 47

I have no reply yet. One email sent on the 10th and then resent today. I have however had emails from my personal domain get lost in a spam folder so I'll try sending from my gmail address next if this doesn't trigger a response.

contact them directly over the messenger on ali express that includes your order , so did I and had a answer the next day.

@jsnyder
Copy link

jsnyder commented Oct 17, 2024

contact them directly over the messenger on ali express that includes your order , so did I and had a answer the next day.

Just looked. Instead of replying to the email they responded on AliExpress for me.

@DTopp
Copy link

DTopp commented Oct 18, 2024

I received my reply via AliExpress chat too.

@meshtastic-bot
Copy link

This issue has been mentioned on Meshtastic. There might be relevant details there:

https://meshtastic.discourse.group/t/meshtastic-scotland/11479/248

@joan7770
Copy link

Since the hardware is being fixed with a new revision, will the board be added back to the web flasher and OTA update on the app?

@fifieldt
Copy link
Contributor

@joan7770 yes indeed - developers are just waiting to receive a board to do some final testing before that happens.

@hank
Copy link

hank commented Oct 24, 2024

Replacement going well on AliExpress chat. Thanks Heltec for not sucking!

@hayschan
Copy link

I've also bought their new T114 v2. Hope everything goes well.

@jangrewe
Copy link

I can confirm that they replied to an email via AliExpress message, ~14 hours after the email.
But since that is now 2 weeks ago, i was wondering if anybody has already received their Rev 2.0 board?

@daniel4999
Copy link

The response I received was that they would send it out in sequential order at the end of the month

@gpi-ct
Copy link

gpi-ct commented Oct 28, 2024

I contacted them through Aliexpress messaging and they replied same day with "Your order has been registered. We will ship it to you after the new version is put on the shelves. Please wait patiently"
Nice.

@guryonblaze
Copy link

IMG_3859

Ordered 3 recieved 4, the store packed in my replacement for the v1 I had ordered previously

IMG_3858

@guryonblaze
Copy link

Quick update, Bluetooth is a lot more solid, and long messages are passing through

@skylerwshaw
Copy link

@guryonblaze, who was replacing your boards? Here's to hoping Muzi and other vendors receive them soon as well! Thanks for the update.

@guryonblaze
Copy link

@guryonblaze, who was replacing your boards? Here's to hoping Muzi and other vendors receive them soon as well! Thanks for the update.

A store on Aliexpress (Moonmall Store), was really impressed they packed the replacement with my order, but guess it makes sense as it saves shipping.

@hayschan
Copy link

Just got the T114 v2. Really impressive stuff.

@lupusworax
Copy link

lupusworax commented Oct 31, 2024

Just got the T114 v2. Really impressive stuff.

You mean because it works now? Or what exactly is impressive? Where you able to do some testing? How about the results?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
hardware cantfix Hardware problem, can't be fixed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests