Best method to determine a mesh node is able to communicate with other node

[choehyunho]

Hi teams,

I am finding a way to check whether a mesh node is currently able to communicate with other node.

We are planning to deploy many mesh nodes to proper position where each nodes can successfully communicate with each other.

Each nodes will be pre-provisioned before deployment, and I want to guarantee each nodes to be in RF range to communicate with.

Because our devices cannot utilize RTT or UART during deployment, we are trying to display this information via some LED action.

Is there any proper way to check this node is currently communicating with other node inside Mesh SDK? Or should I design/modify my mesh model to implement this function?

[Mttrinh]

Hi,

Sorry for the late response.

I would suggest making use of the available mechanisms. I see two ways to implement this:

Method 1:
For desired received model messages, you can intercept the "access_message_rx_meta_t" data which contains the RSSI value, and use this value to drive LEDs as per your choice. 

This is bit hacky and it will require intercepting this information either in `app_*.c` modules, or in `access.c` module in `access_incoming_handle()` function. 

Method 2:
This is more elaborate but more powerful. You can implement and make use of the RSSI monitor models in the combination of health server and client models (that can publish health status messages periodically). The RSSI models are described here:
https://infocenter.nordicsemi.com/topic/com.nordic.infocenter.meshsdk.v4.1.0/md_models_vendor_rssi_monitor_README.html?cp=7_2_2_4_5_2

[choehyunho]

Hi, Mttrinh.

Thank you for your answer. I was quite dedicated to another task and still haven't enough time to this subject.

But, while reviewing some features in the Mesh SDK, I think Mesh health server/client model can be useful for this purpose.

Is it possible that I assign health_server_attention_cb in my main procedure and get some information about this node is linked with other nodes or not?

Because I just wonder about the whole node status, not the specific model, this may be better for my purpose.