ScotMesh: Imported from the BookStack wiki (backup 2026-09-11)

2026-09-11T14:49:18Z

Imported from the BookStack wiki (backup 2026-09-11)

New page

The fastest way to explain Reticulum to someone technical is to say what it is ''not''. This page is a comparison, not an argument — the other systems here are good at things Reticulum is bad at, and several of them are worth running alongside it.

== The one-line version ==

Meshtastic and MeshCore are '''applications with a radio protocol underneath'''. Reticulum is a '''networking stack that runs over anything''', including those radios. They are not competitors so much as different layers of the same stack.

== At a glance ==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! Reticulum
! Meshtastic / MeshCore
! LoRaWAN
|-
| What it is
| Networking stack
| Mesh messaging system
| Star network for sensors
|-
| Runs over
| LoRa, packet radio, WiFi, TCP/IP, I2P, serial
| LoRa (its own protocol)
| LoRa
|-
| Addressing
| Self-issued cryptographic identities
| Node IDs on a channel
| Device IDs registered with a network server
|-
| Who you register with
| Nobody
| Nobody
| A network operator
|-
| Encryption
| End to end, always, forward secrecy
| Shared channel key
| Device-to-server keys
|-
| Needs infrastructure
| No
| No
| Yes — gateways and a server
|-
| Typical use
| Messaging, files, pages, voice, tunnelling
| Text and position between handhelds
| Telemetry from many small sensors
|}

== Versus Meshtastic and MeshCore ==

These are the ones people most often have already, so the distinction matters.

They are complete systems: a firmware, a radio protocol, a phone app, and a way of sharing a channel key. They are excellent at what they do — a group of walkers with handhelds, position beacons on a hill, a shared channel that just works out of the box. Setup is minutes.

Reticulum solves a different problem. It gives you an '''addressable, encrypted network''' where every endpoint has its own identity and traffic can cross whatever bearers happen to exist between two points. A message can leave a LoRa radio, cross the internet, traverse I2P and arrive over someone's wifi, and none of the intermediate nodes can read it or need to know anything about the ones beyond them.

Practical differences you will notice:

* '''Channel key versus identity.''' On Meshtastic, everyone with the channel key reads everything on that channel. On Reticulum, messages are addressed and encrypted to a specific identity — relays carry ciphertext they cannot decrypt.
* '''Reach.''' Meshtastic reaches as far as its mesh does. Reticulum reaches as far as any chain of bearers goes, including the internet.
* '''Effort.''' Meshtastic is easier to start. Reticulum asks more of you up front and gives you a great deal more room afterwards.
* '''Scope.''' Meshtastic does messages and positions. Reticulum carries anything — files, pages, voice, even tunnelled protocols.

You can sensibly run both, and we do. A Meshtastic or MeshCore radio for local chatter, Reticulum for anything that needs to leave the hill.

== Versus LoRaWAN ==

Different world entirely, despite the shared radio. LoRaWAN is a star topology: devices talk to gateways, gateways forward to a network server, and applications collect from there. It is built for large numbers of small sensors reporting infrequently, and it is very good at that.

It also assumes infrastructure and an operator. Devices are registered, keys are provisioned, and the network server is a party you depend on. Reticulum has no equivalent role — there is nothing to register with, and no operator who could revoke you.

If you are reading a hundred water meters, use LoRaWAN. If you want people to talk to each other without asking anyone's permission, that is not what it is for.

== Versus the plain internet, or a VPN ==

Worth being honest here, because for many purposes the internet is simply better: faster, higher capacity, and already working.

What Reticulum gives you that it does not:

* '''No addressing dependency.''' No DNS, no static IPs, no port forwarding, no dynamic DNS. You address an identity, and the network finds it.
* '''It degrades instead of failing.''' If the internet goes away, a Reticulum network over LoRa keeps working. Slowly, but it works.
* '''Nobody to ask.''' No account, no provider, no certificate authority.
* '''Encryption is not optional''' and not bolted on.

What it costs you: '''bandwidth and latency'''. Over LoRa you are working in bytes per second, not megabits. Do not expect to stream anything. Even over TCP the stack is optimised for reachability over throughput.

A VPN gets you encrypted reach between machines you control, but it needs an address to connect to, a server someone runs, and keys someone manages. Reticulum needs none of those, at the cost of speed.

== When to run more than one ==

Most people here should. The combinations that make sense:

* '''Meshtastic or MeshCore for local, Reticulum for reach.''' Local chatter stays local; anything that must travel goes over Reticulum.
* '''Reticulum over the internet and over LoRa at once.''' Enable both interfaces. It uses whichever has a path, and you keep working when one disappears — which is the entire argument for the thing.

The question is rarely which network to use, but which bearer suits the moment. Reticulum is the layer that stops you having to choose.

[[Category:Getting Started]]

How it compares - Revision history

ScotMesh: Imported from the BookStack wiki (backup 2026-09-11)