Power Line Broadband

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

<http/news.com.com/IBM%2C+partner+aim+to+offer+broadband+from+a+wall+plug/2100-1034_3-5782194.html?tag=nefd.top>

....consumers will be able to receive Internet connections at
about 7 megabits a second, equal to some of the fastest
speeds available from cable companies.

---

7Mb/s might be enough for HDTV using MPEG-4.

Kirk Bayne
alt.video.digital-tv Home Page
<http/www.geocities.com/lislislislis/avdtv.htm>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Broadband over power lines renders the shortwave band useless. The ham radio
operators (who provide vital services during natural disasters like the
current hurricane) will fight this.

"K. B." <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote in message
news:8q04d1lgh67fi3ehfb3fjmb6vcq9p7fok0@4ax.com...
> <http/news.com.com/IBM%2C+partner+aim+to+offer+broadband+from+a+wall+plug/2100-1034_3-5782194.html?tag=nefd.top>
>
> ...consumers will be able to receive Internet connections at
> about 7 megabits a second, equal to some of the fastest
> speeds available from cable companies.
>
> ---
>
> 7Mb/s might be enough for HDTV using MPEG-4.
>
> Kirk Bayne
> alt.video.digital-tv Home Page
> <http/www.geocities.com/lislislislis/avdtv.htm>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"K. B." <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote in message
news:8q04d1lgh67fi3ehfb3fjmb6vcq9p7fok0@4ax.com...
> <http/news.com.com/IBM%2C+partner+aim+to+offer+broadband+from+a+wall+plug/2100-1034_3-5782194.html?tag=nefd.top>
>


....consumers will be able to receive Internet connections at> about 7
megabits a second, equal to some of the fastest> speeds available from cable
companies.
>>
---
>> 7Mb/s might be enough for HDTV using MPEG-4.
>> Kirk Bayne

You have been able to buy FM over mains intercoms and baby minders for
years.

Norweb (a UK electricity company) announced the same technology in ~1995,
stating they had resolved the technical issues and were close to roll out.

They set up Norweb Communications Limited (now Your Communications Ltd.)

Norweb did have some advantages: -

1. Miles of their own ducts through which their already suitably trained
engineers could pull fibre.

2. Geographic coverage in NW UK, which meant they could undercut BT rates
with a regional rate.

3. At the time just about everyone in NW UK was their existing customer, and
so could be directly approached.

4. If the promised technology worked then everyone with power in NW UK was
already on their network.

They had some success with this model, but AFAIK the broadband over mains
never materialised.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

I thought BPL had been pretty much written off as a stupid idea. Power
lines are not designed to efficiently carry signals in the MHz range, and
the same leakage that would wreak havoc with radio reception would also
create huge privacy concerns, since it would be people's internet traffic
radiating all over the place.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

K. B. (hotmail.com@lis2lis2) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> <http/news.com.com/IBM%2C+partner+aim+to+offer+broadband+from+a+wall+plug/2100-1034_3-5782194.html?tag=nefd.top>
>
> ...consumers will be able to receive Internet connections at
> about 7 megabits a second, equal to some of the fastest
> speeds available from cable companies.
>
> ---
>
> 7Mb/s might be enough for HDTV using MPEG-4.

Verizon FIOS runs 15Mbps down and 2Mbps up for $50/month. I don't think
any powerline networking system will stand a chance against this.

http/www22.verizon.com/fiosforhome/channels/fios/root/package.asp

--
Jeff Rife |
| (insert funny signature here)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 10:22:08 -0400 Kimba W. Lion <kimbawlion@aol.com> wrote:

| I thought BPL had been pretty much written off as a stupid idea. Power
| lines are not designed to efficiently carry signals in the MHz range, and
| the same leakage that would wreak havoc with radio reception would also
| create huge privacy concerns, since it would be people's internet traffic
| radiating all over the place.

The data can be encrypted at the bit level, just as it already is done
on cable broadband (since any subscriber could see all the signals in
their segment). So the privacy issue can be addressed, although I do
not know if they are addressing it.

The issue with radio interference actually works both ways. Not only
does it radiate "hash" into the shortwave spectrum, but radio transmitters
in that spectrum and wipe out the digital signals going over the wires.
This all because the power lines are not shielded.

Even shielded cable and twisted pair on telephones are not totally immune.

Verizon and maybe others are starting to deploy fiber. Then we can see
bandwidths at 40 mbps to 4 gbps (depending on how much of it they want
to sell). Broadband over power lines can't match that without encountering
the even larger signal base of VHF/UHF and much more interference.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

><http/news.com.com/IBM%2C+partner+aim+to+offer+broadband+from+a+wall+plug/2100-1034_3-5782194.html?tag=nefd.top>
>
>...consumers will be able to receive Internet connections at
>about 7 megabits a second, equal to some of the fastest
>speeds available from cable companies.

Wow!! 7 megabits a second! A few more improvements, and we'll be able
to reach the slowest speeds offered in Japan, using ADSL!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Company Man" <spook@covert.invalid> wrote in message
news:11d4uap9ss46q04@corp.supernews.com...
> Broadband over power lines renders the shortwave band useless. The ham
radio
> operators (who provide vital services during natural disasters like the
> current hurricane) will fight this.

.... are already fighting this. It's a horror story. Ham's aren't the only
ones adversely affected.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Kimba W. Lion" <kimbawlion@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1121091744.52e98027450529533a427d0067017923@teranews...
> I thought BPL had been pretty much written off as a stupid idea. Power
> lines are not designed to efficiently carry signals in the MHz range, and
> the same leakage that would wreak havoc with radio reception would also
> create huge privacy concerns, since it would be people's internet traffic
> radiating all over the place.

A modified form of BPL may work. One US company is trying local
distribution over medium voltage power lines and it seems to have a much
lower potential for interference. Most of the standard BPL is just awful --
so awful, in fact, that some entire countries have outlawed it. BPL is,
inherently, a broadband source of RF noise.

Attempts to filter BPL emissions have met with mixed success. Filtering
clears some bands of interference but never all of them. I know from
decades of work as an EMI technician and engineer that filters do fail in
service. Any filters that are subject to high voltages (and ever higher
transients) are more apt to fail than others in service. When the filters
fail, either the service goes out or the EMI goes to unbelieveable levels,
wiping out cordless phones, baby monitors, garage door openers. Speaking of
failures, what would some nice, sparky high voltage do to modem circuitry?

Gr-r-r-r! It frosts me to think of the stupidity!

 

[Gman]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <11d4uap9ss46q04@corp.supernews.com>, "Company Man" <spook@covert.invalid> wrote:
>Broadband over power lines renders the shortwave band useless. The ham radio
>operators (who provide vital services during natural disasters like the
>current hurricane) will fight this.
>

They wont have to , The law, congress and the FCC are already on the side of
the amateur radio users.


>"K. B." <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote in message
>news:8q04d1lgh67fi3ehfb3fjmb6vcq9p7fok0@4ax.com...
>>
> <http/news.com.com/IBM%2C+partner+aim+to+offer+broadband+from+a+wall+plug/21
>00-1034_3-5782194.html?tag=nefd.top>
>>
>> ...consumers will be able to receive Internet connections at
>> about 7 megabits a second, equal to some of the fastest
>> speeds available from cable companies.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> 7Mb/s might be enough for HDTV using MPEG-4.
>>
>> Kirk Bayne
>> alt.video.digital-tv Home Page
>> <http/www.geocities.com/lislislislis/avdtv.htm>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"GMAN" <glenzabr@xmission.com> wrote in message
news:dav3f8$16k$1@news.xmission.com...
> In article <11d4uap9ss46q04@corp.supernews.com>, "Company Man"
<spook@covert.invalid> wrote:
> >Broadband over power lines renders the shortwave band useless. The ham
radio
> >operators (who provide vital services during natural disasters like the
> >current hurricane) will fight this.
> >
>
> They wont have to , The law, congress and the FCC are already on the side
of
> the amateur radio users.

The FCC has come out strongly in favor of experiments involving this
"technology." I
can't imagine where you get your information. I am on the regular mailing
list of the
American Radio Relay League, representing many of the nations 600,000 hams.
The
ARRL is gnashing its teeth over the FCC's attitude.

 

[Gman]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <dauj5a22rr9@news1.newsguy.com>, phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 10:22:08 -0400 Kimba W. Lion <kimbawlion@aol.com> wrote:
>
>| I thought BPL had been pretty much written off as a stupid idea. Power
>| lines are not designed to efficiently carry signals in the MHz range, and
>| the same leakage that would wreak havoc with radio reception would also
>| create huge privacy concerns, since it would be people's internet traffic
>| radiating all over the place.
>
>The data can be encrypted at the bit level, just as it already is done
>on cable broadband (since any subscriber could see all the signals in
>their segment). So the privacy issue can be addressed, although I do
>not know if they are addressing it.
>
>The issue with radio interference actually works both ways. Not only
>does it radiate "hash" into the shortwave spectrum, but radio transmitters
>in that spectrum and wipe out the digital signals going over the wires.
>This all because the power lines are not shielded.
>
>Even shielded cable and twisted pair on telephones are not totally immune.
>
>Verizon and maybe others are starting to deploy fiber. Then we can see
>bandwidths at 40 mbps to 4 gbps (depending on how much of it they want
>to sell). Broadband over power lines can't match that without encountering
>the even larger signal base of VHF/UHF and much more interference.
>
http/www.utopianet.org/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"GMAN" <glenzabr@xmission.com> wrote in message
news:dav3f8$16k$1@news.xmission.com...
> They wont have to , The law, congress and the FCC are already on the side
> of
> the amateur radio users.

It's not just armature radio.

Lets go through the list of people that have said they are worried about
interference from it.

Armature radio. 1.8 to 29.7 Mhz
Longwave broadcasters. <500Khz
Short wave broadcasters. 2 to 28Mhz
Standard AM broadcasters. 0.5 to 1.7Mhz
Military/air force users. <500Khz and 1.7 to 30Mhz and on up.
Local air ports. Beacons in the 100 to 300Khz range.
World wide air transport. slivers from LF all the way to 30Mhz and beyond.
Off shore oil. From 29.7 on up to 30 some Mhz. And slivers here or there.
Costal sea transport and communications. Slivers all through the LF and HF
band.
International ocean based shipping. The same slivers through out the LF and
HF band.

Any place that BPL is operating, anything below 30Mhz will basically be
rendered useless by static.

ALL those services would be wiped out by it.

Japan tried it, and then dumped it.

The BPL people have been saying that they can restrict operating frequencies
so they don't interfere with specific services. To stop from interfering
with any existing service, would mean that they couldn't operate on any
frequency. Because almost every frequency slot from 1Hz to 30MHz has some
form of incumbent user.

Heck we have been hammering the FCC for a small armature band in the 5Mhz
region for years. We finally got a small hand full of frequencies that we
could operate on. I shouldn't say frequencies. They are more like channels
that they allowed us to use. And very restricted use at that!

The reason they specified channels for us to operate on, is because we are
not actually getting a new band. They are allowing us to "share" the band
with the existing users. They are making us operate on channels so we don't
interfere with the existing users (that are on other channels).

And the BPL people just want to start pumping wideband static into the power
lines across the country, that will make large portions of the HF band
useless for anyone near by? Are they crazy?????

HF, MF, and LF users are not going to allow it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"GMAN" <glenzabr@xmission.com> wrote in message
news:dav3f8$16k$1@news.xmission.com...
> They wont have to , The law, congress and the FCC are already on the side
> of
> the amateur radio users.

It's not just amateur radio.

Lets go through the list of people that have said they are worried about
interference from it.

Amateur radio. 1.8 to 29.7 Mhz
Longwave broadcasters. <500Khz
Short wave broadcasters. 2 to 28Mhz
Standard AM broadcasters. 0.5 to 1.7Mhz
Military/air force users. <500Khz and 1.7 to 30Mhz and on up.
Local air ports. Beacons in the 100 to 300Khz range.
World wide air transport. slivers from LF all the way to 30Mhz and beyond.
Off shore oil. From 29.7 on up to 30 some Mhz. And slivers here or there.
Costal sea transport and communications. Slivers all through the LF and HF
band.
International ocean based shipping. The same slivers through out the LF and
HF band.

Any place that BPL is operating, anything below 30Mhz will basically be
rendered useless by static.

ALL those services would be wiped out by it.

Japan tried it, and then dumped it.

The BPL people have been saying that they can restrict operating frequencies
so they don't interfere with specific services. To stop from interfering
with any existing service, would mean that they couldn't operate on any
frequency. Because almost every frequency slot from 1Hz to 30MHz has some
form of incumbent user.

Heck we have been hammering the FCC for a small amateur band in the 5Mhz
region for years. We finally got a small hand full of frequencies that we
could operate on. I shouldn't say frequencies. They are more like channels
that they allowed us to use. And very restricted use at that!

The reason they specified channels for us to operate on, is because we are
not actually getting a new band. They are allowing us to "share" the band
with the existing users. They are making us operate on channels so we don't
interfere with the existing users (that are on other channels).

And the BPL people just want to start pumping wideband static into the power
lines across the country, that will make large portions of the HF band
useless for anyone near by? Are they crazy?????

HF, MF, and LF users are not going to allow it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 02:04:01 GMT N9WOS <n9wos@nobugatt.net> wrote:

| Any place that BPL is operating, anything below 30Mhz will basically be
| rendered useless by static.

And when BPL increases bandwidth to compete with the increasing bandwidth
that twisted pair, coax, and fiber can do, then you will wipe out the band
108 MHz to 136 Mhz. Even the small leakage that some cable systems have
causes problems in this range. I've known of cable systems that abandon
any use of carriers in this range of frequencies just to avoid issues with
the aeronautical radio service.


| ALL those services would be wiped out by it.
|
| Japan tried it, and then dumped it.
|
| The BPL people have been saying that they can restrict operating frequencies
| so they don't interfere with specific services. To stop from interfering
| with any existing service, would mean that they couldn't operate on any
| frequency. Because almost every frequency slot from 1Hz to 30MHz has some
| form of incumbent user.

At least 50% of which are still using it.

Power companies would be spending their money more wisely by using their
existing right-of-ways to pull fiber. Sure, it will require _more_ money
up front for them to do it. But once done, they could essentially "0wn"
the ultra high speed (gigabit rate) high speed internet access market.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:08:46 -0700 Sal M. Onella <salmonella@food.poisoning.org> wrote:

| "Kimba W. Lion" <kimbawlion@aol.com> wrote in message
| news:1121091744.52e98027450529533a427d0067017923@teranews...
|> I thought BPL had been pretty much written off as a stupid idea. Power
|> lines are not designed to efficiently carry signals in the MHz range, and
|> the same leakage that would wreak havoc with radio reception would also
|> create huge privacy concerns, since it would be people's internet traffic
|> radiating all over the place.
|
| A modified form of BPL may work. One US company is trying local
| distribution over medium voltage power lines and it seems to have a much
| lower potential for interference. Most of the standard BPL is just awful --
| so awful, in fact, that some entire countries have outlawed it. BPL is,
| inherently, a broadband source of RF noise.
|
| Attempts to filter BPL emissions have met with mixed success. Filtering
| clears some bands of interference but never all of them. I know from
| decades of work as an EMI technician and engineer that filters do fail in
| service. Any filters that are subject to high voltages (and ever higher
| transients) are more apt to fail than others in service. When the filters
| fail, either the service goes out or the EMI goes to unbelieveable levels,
| wiping out cordless phones, baby monitors, garage door openers. Speaking of
| failures, what would some nice, sparky high voltage do to modem circuitry?
|
| Gr-r-r-r! It frosts me to think of the stupidity!

Since when did executives of large corporations work from any other basis?

What would those high voltages do to fiber running along just under the MV
distribution lines?

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

<phil-news-nospam@ipal.net> wrote in message
news:db73ia11plm@news2.newsguy.com...

>
> What would those high voltages do to fiber running along just under the MV
> distribution lines?
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> | Phil Howard KA9WGN

Probably nothing. I have never engineered any fiber systems, but I have
read about them
in the course of routine professional reading. Fiber has no coupling mode
from conductors,
aside from electronic devices that intentionally emit light -- and that
light has to shine into
the _end_ of the fiber.