Particle Mesh Devices and OpenThread Connections in Anticipation of Google Breaking Changes

[will]

Hey there @rocksetta,

To start,

there are things that I really appreciate about the way you are contributing to the Particle community. Among them:

• The fact that you are an educator! You are using your skills and interests to inspire your students and teach them how to build and create things.
• You are both a participant and a contributor to the Particle community. You are providing tips, guidance, and feedback, which benefits Particle and other members of the community. I am thankful for that!

It is also clear that you have a strong desire for Particle to build in out-of-box compatibility with other OpenThread routers and devices to serve your personal use case. You are using this thread, and other threads like it as a means of providing the same feedback in more and different ways to try to compel the same outcome.

It is also clear that, regardless of the response we provide to any particular argument, you will not be satisfied until we have delivered the functionality that you're seeking. This is evident by your comment in this post:

@rocksetta

Doesn’t change my resolve to connect Particle to OpenThread just changes the tactics.

---

However,

I would also like to share that I feel extremely frustrated by your approach to providing that feedback. Rather than simply vocalizing a clear use case and need, you are creating narratives that suggest that Particle is compelled to develop our product in the way that serves your personal interests:

1. By suggesting in this thread that we would have a limited or decreased ability to provide a secure product.

@rocksetta

But Particle has an Experimental Cloud Border Router instead of the on-site Border Router that OpenThread was designed to work with. Breaking changes will put Particle into a difficult situation: continue with their out-of-date product with the security hole, or upgrade to the new OpenThread that breaks the Particle System.

As Ninjatill pointed out, we have the ability to upgrade OpenThread within our Device OS, and part of our value proposition to our customers is handling with breaking changes from technology vendors like Google, and to abstract them to the greatest degree possible to our customers.

@rocksetta

In many ways the Particle Photon is more stable than the Mesh Devices since Particle has made all the software that the Photon needs and does not rely on software from an outside source.

This is not true – the Photon depends on the WICED Wi-Fi SDK from Cypress which is a proprietary networking stack. Mesh represents a net improvement in our ability to provide a transparent networking stack to our internal developers and customers for troubleshooting and improvements. It should be easier, not harder, for us to provide a stable experience on OpenThread in the long term.

2. By suggesting that, by using OpenThread itself, we are compelled to provide a maximum-flexibility user experience

@rocksetta

I just think that open-source Particle Devices using open-source OpenThread should allow users, who paid money for the hardware, to be able to use the devices like all the other hardware that runs OpenThread.

As I have already stated, our use of OpenThread does not compel us to provide any particular user experience to our customers. Nest's most recent products (Nest Cam, Nest Secure, Nest Hello) all ship with OpenThread. Their use of OpenThread does not compel them to provide any particular experience other than the usage that is made available to customers through the interfaces that they provide.

3. By suggesting we are in violation of IP grants by not providing a happy path for connectivity with other OpenThread hardware

@rocksetta

As far as I can tell Particle has a licensing obligation to make their thread certified product work with OpenThread.

Not going to dive into this one, since I addressed it in another thread, here.

---

The problem

with these narratives is that they:

1. Can be inaccurate or misleading, to the detriment of the Particle
2. Are occasionally not in accordance with first rule of etiquette in these forums that applies to every single member of these forums.

@christine

Play nice. People are trying to help, so there’s no need for attitude or general rudeness. Politeness will beat terseness every day of the week

---

From here,

We are both aware that we have a separate PM discussion going on where I've offered my time and availability to hear your feedback and share more about our product roadmap for our Mesh offering. Though we've had trouble coordinating on schedule, the offer continues to stand. You have clear next steps (including my personal email and a link to my calendar) for doing so.

As a company we are very much open to product feedback, but do not feel as compelled to respond to it when it is presented in this way.