[WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failed power company BPL trials)

2013-12-28 Thread ralph
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


Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failed power company BPL trials)

2013-12-28 Thread Clay Stewart
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 

Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failed power company BPL trials)

2013-12-28 Thread Jonathan Schmidt
The power wiring in a building resembles a juniper bush which means that RF 
in the nest of wiring finds lots of antennae near a suitable wavelength that 
are “stubs” on the main trunks.



One can imagine that the various attempts to use that wire, as tempting as 
it seems to electricity, is not really a transmission line by RF but an 
opportunity as antennae.



As the map expands to the external wiring grid, there is a self-same 
replication.  Fractals come to mind.



Home Plug power is promoted to use “power wiring” as the medium of 
propagation.  It really does work well.  It’s low power seems to avoid 
interference with other services.  I’ve always been curious as to the real 
path the coupling takes…through the wire or crippled Wi-Fi-type via 
radiation coupling to near-by stubs…stub-to-stub.



Ham Radio is not the problem.  All the power-wire systems, like DSL, 
negotiate bands of frequencies that bypass strong interference.



The large scale use of power lines, as tempting as it seems at 60Hz, forgets 
that RF doesn’t propagate through the copper/aluminum but on the 
surface…just looking for a suitable or partially suitable stub with a lower 
radational impedence with which to jump off.



It’s been a mystery to me all these years as folks confuse in-conductor 
power with surface-conductor and short wavelength electromagnetic energy as 
being kissing cousins on a wire.



. . . j o n a t h a n







From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
Behalf Of Clay Stewart
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2013 5:19 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 

Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the failed power company BPL trials)

2013-12-28 Thread ralph
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] 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 

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

2013-12-28 Thread CBB - Jay Fuller

We saw quite a bit of the same kind of reports that Clay did and saw IBEC 
deploying in our Electric Coop as well. We subsequently met with some of the 
techs who worked locally with them (they were based in Alabama) who swore up 
and down the technology worked.  In fact, we heard a substantially different 
story - the gov'mt pulled their funding and their insurance company wouldn't 
pay off without the government funding - so they had no choice but to shut down.

Additionally, they were trying to operate with T-1 circuits to the substations. 
 They could have easily asked one of us wireless companies to help put in their 
back haul for them (me thinks) and offered much better speeds - but they never 
did.  In fact, they started doing the paperwork to lay their own fiber to the 
substation - but they never got that far.

Our office (post tornado 2011) is ACROSS THE STREET from the Coop. They know of 
us.  They have no interest in getting back into the broadband biz.  Wish they 
would.

Jay Fuller
Cyber Broadband Inc
Cullman Al

  - 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 

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

2013-12-28 Thread CBB - Jay Fuller

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