"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
et...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

The problem is the the BPL vendors/organizations apparently "pitched"
BPL to the Commissioners as "the greatest thing since sliced bread,
"the infrastructure already exists" (the wires are there, but they'll
have
to spend many millions of ratepayers' money to add all of the couplers,
modems, etc.), and that it would provide a quality, economical
competitor
to xDSL and cable modems, all with 'no problems'."

It's understandable that the Commissioners would get rather excited
at the prospect, BUT they haven't had all of the facts, just hype from
the BPL industry and utilities that are seeing $signs ... despite the
fact
that it's a demonstrably crappy business model. The other reason the
Commissioners would get excited is that they simply don't have the
technical background to see the problems without significant education
on the matter ... and, sadly, NONE of the Commissioners has a technical
advisor on their staff ... several legal advisors each, but not a
technical
advisor amongst them.

NOTE: I am NOT trying to "defend" the FCC's enamourment with BPL,
just explaining how it came to be and what's required to turn it around.

One of the odd things about the commissioners however. They must be
able to suspend disbelief pretty easily.

Household and electrical wiring has been around for a long time. And
there's no rocket science to the technology of riding a signal on a line
voltage circuit. Control signals are sent along these wires regularly
and have been for many years.

So if this was (is) such a good way to send signals, why wasn't the
internet developed this way in the first place?

I believe that I am skeptical enough that even if I didn't have a
technical background, that question would pop up pretty quickly when
considering BPL.

Carl, is there any other way that we can aid this fight?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike,

ARRL is working this hard. Ed Hare was down to Emmaus
again Thu/Fri/Sat, spoke at a local club meeting, and we
did some measurements/comparisons between his field
observations and mine (they correlate perfectly, as I expected)

I am going to do what I can in terms of lobbying folks I know
at the FCC from my professional dealings with them.

The comment and reply comment periods on the NOI are
over, so there will be an apparent lull in activity.

One thing we're eager to see is the reaction of NTIA (on
behalf of their USG "clients") ... I can't believe that they
will come up with any different take on the interference
potential of BPL than ARRL and I have ... and they will
make a powerful ally if I am right.

For the moment, I think we're in a mode of waiting for
NTIA's reaction, some lobbying by folks who know folks,
and other "background" work.

The biggest thing that I fear is the ham community going
ballistic prematurely and flaming the FCC, e-mail bombing
them, etc. That would only hurt our cause.

73,
Carl - wk3c