Where in GA are you? :) Sounds like I need to come rent a boat... ----- Original Message ----- From: ralph To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2013 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (notthe failedpower companyBPL trials)
That’s what I’m looking for, Jay. When I say “Master”, I mean the one functioning as the backhaul to my network. One master on the pole (in the case of MuniWiFi enhancement) (or in the rafters of the covered dock in a marina application) and a number of slaves on the boats or in housed, all on the same secondary. Our marinas have transformers on shore and 60-70 boat slips on the single phase secondary. I could do the whole dock with 2 masters. Of course to have a n Ethernet manageable one would be the cat’s meow. Then we could authorize the subscribers individually, like a CATV CMTS. But since our network is run as a hotspot the size of half a state, they still have to get past the captive portal anyway so that’s why Manageable is just something really nice but not required. The WiFi works pretty well in the boats, but some of these yachts have basements that the WiFi doesn’t get into or the boats are so big (120-150ft) the coverage is poor. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2013 2:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failedpower companyBPL trials) I'll look them up next week - yes - had as many as four connected. There was no "master" unit, it was all one big "bridge", like having them all on a switch ----- Original Message ----- From: ralph To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2013 8:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failedpower companyBPL trials) 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 To: 'WISPA General List' 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 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 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] 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> 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/ 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 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 “We Keep You Up and Running” Wireless Broadband Programming Network Services -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
