What brands did you test? Mainnet's worked as promised for us. No, it was not 500Mbps but 20+ is very cool. -RickG
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Chuck McCown - 3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I read your post, I was also involved in the testing. They didn't hit > their throughput nor did they achieve any of the interference mask > parameters. We tried several versions of this. If you want 512kbps you can > do it. But Michael Powell was promising 500 mbps magically flowing through > all the power lines and lighting up a whole city. > > You are not going to get bi directional 500 mbps on high voltage power lines > (as promised by some) without causing unacceptable interference and > regenerating the signal every 1000 feet. > > Secondary... as in low voltage... as in 240 volt single phase from > transformer to the house does work. Like I said homeplug is a very viable > technology. What some people call BPL is secondary BPL. HV BPL is not > going to be a viable backhaul technology for a variety of reasons. > > Yes, secondary BPL barely works with arguably acceptable (by some). Show me > a HV system that works as advertised. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "RickG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 4:03 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] IBM backs BPL > > >> Chuck, >> >> It's as though you didnt read my post! >> >> BPL works - with acceptable interference - I saw it with my own eyes >> along with dozens of skeptical ham operators. Theory does not matter, >> those issues are conquered. Seeing is believing. >> >> -RickG >> >> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Chuck McCown - 3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> One huge reason, powerlines are not constant impedance to RF. Nor are >>> they >>> balanced. This is like trying to pump natural gas down the water lines. >>> Pipe, right? What's the problem? >>> >>> It is never going to ever work as well as balanced transmission lines, >>> let >>> alone coax or fiber. And it is going to leak so much that the American >>> Red >>> Cross in Afghanistan will be able to detect the static on their HF rigs. >>> This has been proven time and time again. >>> >>> You can get BPL to work over a short range (like a mile) if it is running >>> on >>> a three phase line and the line is very balanced. Once it hits a cap >>> bank, >>> regulator, transposition, transformer or anything, you have to terminate >>> the >>> signal and figure a way to bypass the obstruction. >>> >>> Once you put it on a single phase line you might as well go back to the >>> old >>> G-Line concept (another oddity that ultimately failed). Really BPL is >>> nothing more than G-Line. As long as you don't care about vomiting all >>> over >>> the RF spectrum you can do whatever you want. >>> >>> I actually do listen to AM radio. I want to listen to short-wave and ham >>> if >>> I decide to do so. A half baked idea like HV bpl has no place in ruining >>> valuable spectrum that is absolutely necessary in the event of an >>> emergency. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "RickG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >>> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 2:41 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] IBM backs BPL >>> >>> >>>>I disagree. I personally saw BPL work and work very well. As far as >>>> setting up a bunch of dragonwaves, you must have line of sight. As far >>>> as range, whats the point? Ethernet is only rated at 100 meters and it >>>> is widely used. BPL's range is much farther than that. It's all >>>> realitive. The powergrid is already setup & ready to go, why not use >>>> it? Shouldnt we utilize any and all resources to their fullest >>>> potential? To do otherwise is wasteful. >>>> >>>> BTW: BPL is more widely used and accepted in many other countries >>>> abroad. Several of our potential vendors were non-US. They couldnt >>>> figure out the hold up is here in the states. >>>> >>>> -RickG >>>> >>>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Chuck McCown - 3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> BPL on HV was and is a stupid idea. HV infrastructure was not built >>>>> with >>>>> the idea of being a transmission line for RF. To get any kind if speed >>>>> you >>>>> have to use lots of power, even then it is very very short range. You >>>>> might >>>>> as well set up a whole bunch of dragonwaves in a drop and insert >>>>> system. >>>>> It >>>>> would be cheaper and work better. >>>>> >>>>> The idea of using natural gas distribution lines as circular waveguides >>>>> is a >>>>> much more viable technology. But you don't see that getting deployed >>>>> either. >>>>> >>>>> BPL on HV is a lab experiment that caught the eye of Michael Powell and >>>>> got >>>>> talked about. Nothing more. On the secondary side it is nothing more >>>>> than >>>>> homeplug. That is viable and deployed and does just fine. >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "RickG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 1:32 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] IBM backs BPL >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> To clarify, by "real interference" I meant they are no worse than >>>>>> anything else we deal with. Like any RF transmission, there are >>>>>> emmisions, but those can be dealt with just like the way we (WISP's) >>>>>> deal with them. The ARRL made a mountain out of molehill and it was >>>>>> all political as far as I'm concened. They used the BPL as a scapegoat >>>>>> to try and get the electric companies to fix the interference hams >>>>>> receive from aging electrical insulators which causes all kinds of >>>>>> noise. >>>>>> I personally saw a perfect example of the bias against BPL >>>>>> interference. A parade of hams came to our pilot test site and claimed >>>>>> we were interferering with them then & there. The funny part: We had >>>>>> the system turned off! We showed it to them and they were totally >>>>>> embarrased and speechless. When we turned the system back on, they >>>>>> admitted that the noise was no worse than when it was off. We has >>>>>> spectrum analyzers to prove it. There are some hardliners out there >>>>>> that would not give up. To make their point they would drive their >>>>>> vehicles (equipped with ham radio and whip antenna) within a few feet >>>>>> and directly under the powerline and guess what? Give me break. >>>>>> Basically, except for a few viable installations still running, BPL >>>>>> was killed in it's infancy. Too bad. >>>>>> -RickG >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Jonathan Schmidt >>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>>> "You are correct, electric companies saw huge benefits for internal >>>>>>> use >>>>>>> but the real reason it did not move forward was because electric >>>>>>> companies >>>>>>> are conservative by nature and they didnt like the heat coming from >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> ARRL over interference issues, which btw were not real." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The interference is real. The ARRL is real and very conservative. >>>>>>> And, >>>>>>> any conductor carrying RF that isn't a proper, geometrically arranged >>>>>>> transmission line, properly terminated in the proper impedance, will >>>>>>> radiate and radiate most of its RF energy. Where do you think that >>>>>>> goes? >>>>>>> And, where do stubs dissipate their RF?...into the 4th dimension? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Were it not for careful oversight of the spectrum, we would be back >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> stone ages with AM and FM and TV because of interference. Police and >>>>>>> fire >>>>>>> radios would be hit and miss. Our licensed and unlicensed spectrum >>>>>>> would >>>>>>> be a mess. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Blasting the HF spectrum into random lengths of conductors and stubs >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> watts of power has proved to be nasty. It isn't just the ARRL...the >>>>>>> courts have decided that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It isn't just RF on the power lines, either. You can hear DSL >>>>>>> interference in neighborhoods with overhead telephone wiring on poles >>>>>>> when >>>>>>> you try to listen to local AM stations at night when they are forced >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> drop their power. The political influence of the Telcos to force >>>>>>> through >>>>>>> their agenda may be followed by that of the electric companies but it >>>>>>> won't be to our advantage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They have the right of way, the poles, and the money. Stringing a >>>>>>> fiber >>>>>>> along the poles along with the wiring would seem to be a far better >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> long term strategy than to pretend that wires are wires and that 60Hz >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> the same as 600,000Hz and the ground return and distribution are >>>>>>> compatible architectures. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The entire concept is pseudo-science, appealing to those who are >>>>>>> easily >>>>>>> fooled into thinking wishes become true because it sorta makes sense. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jonathan Schmidt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> >>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>> >>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>> >>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
