BPL strikes another win ...
 

John Smith I wrote:
http://www.redherring.com/Home/22562

JS

THIS:

"There is a fourth technology rearing its head, one that uses ordinary
power lines to deliver high speed internet. Down in Texas, Broadband
over Powerline (BPL) will be delivered to close to two million people in
the Dallas–Fort Worth area, beginning at the end of this year.

This technology, which obviously utilizes power lines, is said to be
faster than cable or DSL systems, and has matching upload and download
speeds (in some systems the upload speed is slower than the download).
Apparently, installation fees are minimal, since the system works via a
modem plugged into any electrical outlet.

There's always a hitch, however. The power system seems to need to be of
a smart grid type, which is two-way in that it collects data while
transmitting power. Whether that is even feasible in Nova Scotia remains
to be seen.

In any case, the wireless system used in North Queens seemed, to me, to
be fast and reliable. With large company like EastLink set to assume the
service, former and future broadband customers in the area will be able
to sign on with confidence."

FROM
HEhttp://www.novanewsnow.com/article-1...ars-later.html

Regards,
JS

BPL strikes another win ...
 

Michael Coslo wrote:
Dave Oldridge wrote:

Algorithms will only help you by slowing down and using redundancy or
by being frequency agile and thereby clearng off my frequency. And NO
equipment DESIGNED to be a sensitive receiver at the frequencies you
want to use will be immune to even stronger signals picked up by the
open ANTENNA that you're using for a "transmission cable."



Good point, Dave. Any error correction comes with the expense of
time, and of course slows down the transmission of the data. The packet
doesn't jibe, so it is asked for again, and again, and so on. Better be
a heck of a algorithim when the interfering signal is really strong as
to swamp the modem's reciever.

This is only true if you're doing a ARQ type protocol. If you're
expecting interference (and BPL certainly is), a Forward Error
Correction type strategy would be a much better bet. For instance, ECC
memory uses a rate 8/11 code (3 syndrome bits for 8 databits) to correct
any single bit error and detect double bit errors. For BPL, one would
probably choose some form of multiple carrier encoding (since
interferers are likely to be narrow band) with some form of interleaving
(since interferers are bursty), and a fairly robust code.

The whole art and engineering of communication link design comes from
selecting that tradeoff between redundancy and reliability. Do you send
twice as many bits, twice as fast, to get an overall lower data rate
(e.g. a rate 1/2 code).


There are plenty of examples to the contrary of the digital signal
as robust entity. Experiments have been made in which a 5 watt signal in
a car with a mobile antenna will knock out nearby BPL signals. 100 watts
in a car will do even more damage, and a base station yet more. Other
experiments have shown the so called notches being abandoned after the
system was unable to send good packets. Kind of like it was getting
desperate almost.

But this is merely an example of a specific bad implementation of BPL.
There's no physics reason why one couldn't make it work (whether it's
cost effective is another story).


Seeing as how qrp levels into inefficient antennas can cause
problems, I have to wonder what will happen during the next sunspot max.

The signal level received via ionospheric paths are so low, that the BPL
receiver isn't going to have any trouble regardless of how good
propagation is. OTOH, the interference radiated by BPL will spread that
much wider.


The whole BPL affair makes me kind of wonder why shielding was
invented.

And for what? a DSL speed "broadband" digital signal? BPL is a poor
solution to the problems of ten years ago. It is the 8-track of
broadband access.

But it if it provides access to capital markets for the relatively small
number of people working in the BPL industry, so they can get paid their
salaries and bonuses, then it's a good thing for them.

It doesn't actually have to *work* to succesfully employ hundreds of
people and get dozens of people a big bonus. Sure, eventually, it will
fall by the wayside and be abandoned, and all those BPL toilers will go
on to a new technology or job. I'm sure there were folks who made a lot
of money on Betamax cassette design and manufacturing too. (or 8 tracks,
for that matter)

(Oddly, the wayside is about the only place BPL would work.. think of
telemetering data from trains)


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

BPL strikes another win ...
 

John Smith I wrote in news:fad6n1$9tv$1
@news.albasani.net:

Dave Oldridge wrote:

...

This thread is beginning to switch gears, now we seem to be on the
subject of jamming; jamming is obviously possible. A simple 100 MW
white noise generator driving my KW+ lab amp would tear up a good chunk
of my neighborhood, given the right ant/circumstances. Heck, I would
probably even be placing enough of a signal on the phone lines to slow
up 56K dialup modems also.

Somehow, I just wouldn't get anything out of it. And, given the few
active hams in the US, the logic of logistics says, "moot point."

But, for those egos imagining themselves special, deserving and
empowered above mere mortals--they are allowed to dream. ROFLOL!

However, it appears the world according to you will end up with
laws/rules/regulations being passed to halt amateurs jamming of
citizens
use of the internet. With as much damage as some amateurs have done to
the hobby and image of amateurs in general--I guess it won't matter too
much.

I'm just saying, given human nature and the regulations we are under, the
amateur community will be forced by the rising noise levels to resort to
higher power levels than before. I mean right now, I can get into my
nets with 25 watts and an 8-foot antenna on 80m. Put broad-band
powerline noise in the receivers of the net control stations and I'm
going to have to up the power and possibly use a more efficient antenna
to accomplish that. This is a recipe for interference, not just with BPL
but with any sensitive equipment that happens to do square-law AM
detection.

And yes, you're probably right about the politics. Who cares about
tradition or reason these days. It's all about money and me-me-me-me-me.

--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

BPL strikes another win ...
 

John Smith I wrote in news:fadbdc$l8j$1
@news.albasani.net:

Dave Oldridge wrote:
...

http://pr-gb.com/index.php?option=co...281&It emid=9

http://www.bpltoday.com/public/1212.cfm?affID=prgb1

Crass, opportunistic crap propaganda. There is also a very stable network
in place called the telephone system which is ALREADY delivering high speed
internet to a great many homes.

This is just a $$ grab by certain factions trying to shoehorn an internet
market share in an industry they did nothing to create.

Sorry, I'm not impressed by such blathering. But I imagine a lot of naive
politicians are and the current political thinking in both our countries
seems to be to the effect that it doesn't matter HOW someone makes their
dollars as long as they make them.


--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

BPL strikes another win ...
 

John Smith I wrote in
:

Dave Oldridge wrote:

...
Algorithms will only help you by slowing down and using redundancy or
by being frequency agile and thereby clearng off my frequency. And
NO equipment DESIGNED to be a sensitive receiver at the frequencies
you want to use will be immune to even stronger signals picked up by
the open ANTENNA that you're using for a "transmission cable."

Dream on.

Look, I don't want to tell you how to engineer. But you've obviously
got your mind made up and the facts and experience of others be
damned.


My son, in florida, contracts to supply firmware for these modems ...
advise all you wish; I will continue to make your posts available to
him. grin

Ahh, well, when he contracs to supply firmware that automatically gets
the signal out of my way, then maybe he'll earn his money!



--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

BPL strikes another win ...
 

Dave Oldridge wrote:
There is also a very stable network
in place called the telephone system which is ALREADY delivering high speed
internet to a great many homes.

For performance/price, it's certainly hard to beat
AT&T's DSL (available for $10 a month in some places)
Here at my new QTH, DSL is $15 per month compared to
Suddenlink's $40 per month over TV cable. If AT&T
isn't careful, they are going to create another
monopoly to be broken up by the Democrats. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

BPL strikes another win ...
 

Jon Kåre Hellan wrote:

And do remember that a ham antanna doesn't 'radiate'. It 'emanates
energies'.

73
LA4RT Jon

Yes, absolutely. And hopefully it is a device from which positive
vibrational energies might emanate. (unlike some computer keyboards) :-)

73, ac6xg

BPL strikes another win ...
 

Jon ?Q?K=C3=A5re?= Hellan wrote in
:

Sorry. I didn't notice that I cut everything you wrote, but left your
name in.

Apolgy accepted.

Please be carefull putting silly words into the mouths of others. If I
appear to have overreacted, it is because it would well suit the BPL box
movers to damage my credibility.

Owen

BPL strikes another win ...
 

Owen Duffy wrote:
wrote:
Sorry. I didn't notice that I cut everything you wrote, but left your
name in.

Apolgy accepted.

Actually, with nested well-behaved newsreader
software doing the attributions, one doesn't
have to worry at all about such.

If one sees:

w5dxp wrote:

Owen Duffy wrote:
I admit that I am an asshole.

it can actually be attributed to w5dxp.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

BPL strikes another win ...
 

Cecil Moore wrote in news:NHJyi.698$YQ.462
@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com:

Owen Duffy wrote:
wrote:
Sorry. I didn't notice that I cut everything you wrote, but left your
name in.

Apolgy accepted.

Actually, with nested well-behaved newsreader
software doing the attributions, one doesn't
have to worry at all about such.

If one sees:

w5dxp wrote:

Owen Duffy wrote:
I admit that I am an asshole.

it can actually be attributed to w5dxp.

Cecil, for all your claimed IQ, you are just offensive... Owen