Thanks Jay.

Did you ever try to get more than one remote to connect to a master without 
doing anything special?

That’s my ultimate goal. And do you remember the model unit you used?

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2013 1:43 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failed power companyBPL 
trials)

 

 

Ralph - pretty sure we used the netgear model units and they did not require 
anything more than plug and pray.  Worked great.

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: ralph <mailto:ralphli...@bsrg.org>  

To: 'WISPA General List' <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>  

Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2013 8:39 PM

Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failed power companyBPL 
trials)

 

Then you may not be talking about what I am talking about.

I think it may have been Duke Power who did some of the 1st generation 
trial/pilots I speak of.  It was quite a while ago,  It was too expensive, 
didn’t work well, and, well, yes it certainly did interfere with licensed users 
(Ham Radio and International broadcasters). It is a part 15 service. It 
transmits on unshielded wires on approximately 2-30 MHz. This covers almost all 
low frequency Ham bands, International broadcast, and CB.  Here is the database 
of the “trials”  <http://p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/ex2.html#Cities> 
http://p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/ex2.html#Cities  It is way out of date, but 
there is tons of interesting information here. Unfortunately a great many of 
the links are broken.

 

The two most spectacular failures were those of IBEC, (the company I believe 
Clay is describing) who folded January of 2012. They cited the power line 
disruption from the Southeastern Tornadoes as the reason.  These are the same 
tornadoes that tore up several of us here on this list- especially in Alabama!  
IBEC was competing with WISPS and all the while causing illegal interference to 
FCC licensed users.

 
<http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-shows-ibec-bpl-systems-are-interfering-violating-fcc-rules>
 
http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-shows-ibec-bpl-systems-are-interfering-violating-fcc-rules

 

The second was the City of Manassas, VA, who started their trial way back in 
2002. The “plug was pulled” on their BPL in July of 2010.

 

A little Google-ing will find you demonstrations of how horrible the 
interference was.

 

The part 15 rules concerning BPL are very interesting:  47 C.F.R. §15.615  
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/15.615

 

The official database of BPL systems that operators are, per the FCC, supposed 
to list their systems in at least 30 days before beginning operations is at  
http://www.bpldatabase.org/listing/  IBEC repeatedly violated that FCC rule

 

 

 

 

 

The most recent technology (HomePlug) incorporates protection 
(filtering/notching)  for the Amateur bands and is a much more friendly 
neighbor.

 

Speaking of your Radio Shack devices (and I had a lot of them too) – they were 
based on the BSR X10 technology. The 80’s stuff was pretty poor. Later on it 
evolved to be a lot better and even worked bidirectionally, which really helped 
the reliability.  Many home automation companies sprang up to utilize the 
technology. When I was in the burglar business we laughed at the “Car Trunkers” 
trying to sell an alarm based on them- before they were even 2 way.  My smart 
thermostat uses the X-10 passive infrared sensors to let it know when the 
different rooms are occupied.

 

And like yours, many of modules are now dead, but I try to keep a few around to 
use to turn the Christmas lights off and on.   That X10 company who advertised 
us to death a few years ago was also responsible for those 2.4 GHz analog video 
cameras that can singlehandedly wipe out the entire 2.4 WiFi band. Boy am I 
glad they don’t advertise like that anymore! They seem to have calmed down and 
are mostly about security and switching again now.

 

 

 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org <mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org>  
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Clay Stewart
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2013 6:19 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failed power company 
BPL trials)

 

Funny to see this today. I was upgrading a customers equipment today who works 
for the Electric company that provided service for BPL here, until it failed.

 

He was telling me how they are still, after two years, finding and pulling the 
equipment off their poles and piling them up in a heap.

 

I would like to make a correction on A above. It was not a trail and it did not 
fail due to ham radio interference.

 

This one company walked away after failing due to the technology... after 
spending well over 130 million dollars of tax payer money. I would suggest 
twice that in order expenditures, such as the direct costs to our local 
Electric Cooperative company. The best speeds obtained were 4-5, but 90% or 
more was less then 400k!! Fact, I replaced many of these, including a 
manufacturer two blocks away from the BLP NOC, who had 300k D and 45k U!

 

The technological issues were plenty, but the reason they failed, went 
bankrupt, was because the business model did not match the technology reality. 
When a lightning storm came through, it would take out several relays which 
were used to bypass pole transformers. Then, not the ISP, but a certified 
electrician and line man had to do the repairs... usually several down a route 
at great expense. Storms were draining the money... until tornadoes in Alabama 
threw in the last straw... so many outages on poles combined with loss 
revenue... killed the company.

 

For that kind of money, a WISP could have built dozens of 110' towers across 
many counties and delivered many times the speed.

 

What a loss... what a waste... this is a hidden story where the funding 
(granting) agency should have been hung.

 

As for home automation... this stuff has been around for many years. Using 
Radio Shack control switches, I automated a home in the early 80s. I 
deautomated it in the early 90s before selling the house.... the reason... 
after a few short years, most control units had been fried from normal surges 
in the electric system (storms).

 

 

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:49 AM, ralph <ralphli...@bsrg.org 
<mailto:ralphli...@bsrg.org> > wrote:

I am writing this because I just read an old thread from around 9/20/13 on 
AFMUG in which BPL was being discussed.  

I’m no longer on that list due to the amount of traffic, but I’d like to 
discuss it more here.

 

 

A.      The failed power company BPL trials were a unique technology.  However 
the frequencies used were not compatible with both Amateur Radio and with 
International broadcasters. They were shut down due to much lobbying from both 
groups as well as several technical and economic challenges.   It also still 
required WiFi of some type to get the signal from the pole/transformer to the 
end user. Good riddance to them and their noisy interference!

 

B.      But the technology that has proven to be useful is more localized: Home 
Power Line Networking. Check out  <https://www.homeplug.org/home/> 
https://www.homeplug.org/home/

 

There is a lot of potential for us in these devices.

 

 

They originally began as “Home Plug” which carried data at up to at 14 Mbps 
back in 2001.

 

They have a newer, more robust standard called Homeplug AV and supposedly is 
good for 200 Mbps. We have tested them for a year and have been (or plan to be) 
experimenting with several applications:

 

1.      We do a lot of Marinas. We already have our WiFi APs plugged in to AC 
at each dock. We will use HPAV to deliver “hardwired” connectivity to those who 
don’t want to use WiFi.

 

2.      We do Muni WiFi. Since we are already on the poles and have access to 
the power company secondary, we may plug in a unit along with our other devices 
in the box on the pole.  This will allow us to deliver “hardwire” connectivity 
to at least half the houses on that transformer.  So in a lot of cases it will 
be useful.

 

3.      We do MDUs. Same rationale as #2, but equipment closets instead of 
poles.

 

Yes we know all about the transformer issue. It will eliminate some potential 
users, but we are on a lot of poles and in a lot of closets. In some cases we 
can access both legs of the single phase line anyway.

 

We can send the customer to many places both local and online to get their home 
unit.

 

Here is the only rub:

 

All the units I have tried require the two units to be “married” You can have 
many units on a “network” but their security requires the users to press a 
button to synch the with the master one. This is actually setting an AES 
security key And you have to press a button on the master each time you add a 
remote. I am calling them master and remote here, but the units are identical. 
I’m using the term to differentiate between the home unit and the one on the 
pole. Someone did tell me of a set they tried that “just worked” 

 

In most of my applications, the AES security does not matter- remember the core 
system is an open WiFi network anyway.  I would rather users be able to use a 
simple, easy to obtain unit. With the newer paired units having that preset, it 
may knock out some flexibility. These may be what the person referenced above 
may have had.

 

What I really want to see a manufacturer come out with is a manageable unit we 
can put as the “base”.  Similar to  a WiFi AP, we could do authorizing (similar 
to MAC authentication or like DOCSIS cable modems are remotely activated with 
the CMTS) of remote devices on the same line.  Customer plugs in, calls up, 
gives address of  his unit and we authorize it. If they don’t pay, they get 
shut off. 

 

Of course we could stock and ship units that were preset with our AES code, but 
it would be a nightmare keeping all that straight as well as an investment in 
equipment we wouldn’t want to make.  

 

As I said, there is lots of potential in Home Plug AV  right now, and even more 
if the equipment becomes a little more flexible.  I’m just putting the ideas 
out there.  

 

Anyone else using them or planning to use them in novel ways.

 


_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org> 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless





 

-- 


-- 
SCS     
  Clay Stewart 
  CEO, Tye River Farms, Inc., 
  DBA Stewart Computer Services   
  434.263.6363 O 
  434.942.6510 C
  cstew...@stewartcomputerservices.com 
<mailto:cstew...@stewartcomputerservices.com>   
“We Keep You Up and Running” 
           Wireless Broadband
           Programming
          Network Services

  _____  

_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org> 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to