Re: [WISPA] Ethernet over power lines (not the 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 <mailto:ralphli...@bsrg.org> To: 'WISPA General List' <mailto:wireless@wispa.org> 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> [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, whi
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
