Slashdot Mirror

Probably because not all of the utilities are using the newer equipment. There are only a few equipment manufacturers which make the gear with proper notching, and very few utilities are using the newer equipment. There are current deployments, and current "testing" deployments, which are using the older, noisy equipment.

http://www.qrpis.org/~k3ng/bpl.html#61 tells who the (currently two) manufacturers are with "clean" equipment. The rest of the page answers a lot of questions about why the problem still exists.

Again, just because YOUR utility is using newer equipment doesn't mean that EVERY utility is doing so... and for those who have to deal with BPL interference every day, this information is NOT "fud".

There are serious issues with BPL. It generates interference that compromises several amateur radio bands, and is likewise interfered with by the legal operation of numerous low-power transmitters. (This includes CB radio transmitters as well as ham radio transmitters.)

I think that the 5 people who this will negatively impact will be rendered insignificant by the thousands that it would benefit. It's the same argument that people use to negate the complaints of Mac users, except hams are a MUCH MUCH smaller percentage of the population.

(waits for inevitable ham flames)

I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I do want to rebut the assertion in the parent posting that BPL is a technology that is "inevitably going to be made available to everyone." Economic calculations show that, despite what backers assert, BPL will be subject to the same economic constraints as other broadband technology in terms of connections per mile versus costs per mile. If BPL ever gets deployed, it will get deployed in the same areas where broadband service is already provided, or will be provided, by existing technologies such as cable modem and DSL.

There's an outstanding Broadband over Power Lines FAQ that is really required reading for anyone who wants to debate knowledgeably about the issues, rather than just troll for arguments. It is, of course, written from a rebuttal perspective, but it goes to great lengths to explain the answers with objective technical and political justifications.

In particular:

Q: Why are some Hams so emotional in their opposition to BPL?

Q: If this just affects Ham Radio, why should anyone care?

Q: Won't BPL be different than Cable and DSL and deliver broadband to those who don't have it, especially in rural areas?

Q: To date, have any US BPL systems been shut down due to interference?

Q: To date, have any BPL systems been deactivated due to business reasons?

There are serious issues with BPL. It generates interference that compromises several amateur radio bands, and is likewise interfered with by the legal operation of numerous low-power transmitters. (This includes CB radio transmitters as well as ham radio transmitters.)

I think that the 5 people who this will negatively impact will be rendered insignificant by the thousands that it would benefit. It's the same argument that people use to negate the complaints of Mac users, except hams are a MUCH MUCH smaller percentage of the population.

(waits for inevitable ham flames)

I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I do want to rebut the assertion in the parent posting that BPL is a technology that is "inevitably going to be made available to everyone." Economic calculations show that, despite what backers assert, BPL will be subject to the same economic constraints as other broadband technology in terms of connections per mile versus costs per mile. If BPL ever gets deployed, it will get deployed in the same areas where broadband service is already provided, or will be provided, by existing technologies such as cable modem and DSL.

There's an outstanding Broadband over Power Lines FAQ that is really required reading for anyone who wants to debate knowledgeably about the issues, rather than just troll for arguments. It is, of course, written from a rebuttal perspective, but it goes to great lengths to explain the answers with objective technical and political justifications.

In particular:

Q: Why are some Hams so emotional in their opposition to BPL?

Q: If this just affects Ham Radio, why should anyone care?

Q: Won't BPL be different than Cable and DSL and deliver broadband to those who don't have it, especially in rural areas?

Q: To date, have any US BPL systems been shut down due to interference?

Q: To date, have any BPL systems been deactivated due to business reasons?

There are serious issues with BPL. It generates interference that compromises several amateur radio bands, and is likewise interfered with by the legal operation of numerous low-power transmitters. (This includes CB radio transmitters as well as ham radio transmitters.)

I think that the 5 people who this will negatively impact will be rendered insignificant by the thousands that it would benefit. It's the same argument that people use to negate the complaints of Mac users, except hams are a MUCH MUCH smaller percentage of the population.

(waits for inevitable ham flames)

I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I do want to rebut the assertion in the parent posting that BPL is a technology that is "inevitably going to be made available to everyone." Economic calculations show that, despite what backers assert, BPL will be subject to the same economic constraints as other broadband technology in terms of connections per mile versus costs per mile. If BPL ever gets deployed, it will get deployed in the same areas where broadband service is already provided, or will be provided, by existing technologies such as cable modem and DSL.

There's an outstanding Broadband over Power Lines FAQ that is really required reading for anyone who wants to debate knowledgeably about the issues, rather than just troll for arguments. It is, of course, written from a rebuttal perspective, but it goes to great lengths to explain the answers with objective technical and political justifications.

In particular:

Q: Why are some Hams so emotional in their opposition to BPL?

Q: If this just affects Ham Radio, why should anyone care?

Q: Won't BPL be different than Cable and DSL and deliver broadband to those who don't have it, especially in rural areas?

Q: To date, have any US BPL systems been shut down due to interference?

Q: To date, have any BPL systems been deactivated due to business reasons?

There are serious issues with BPL. It generates interference that compromises several amateur radio bands, and is likewise interfered with by the legal operation of numerous low-power transmitters. (This includes CB radio transmitters as well as ham radio transmitters.)

I think that the 5 people who this will negatively impact will be rendered insignificant by the thousands that it would benefit. It's the same argument that people use to negate the complaints of Mac users, except hams are a MUCH MUCH smaller percentage of the population.

(waits for inevitable ham flames)

I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I do want to rebut the assertion in the parent posting that BPL is a technology that is "inevitably going to be made available to everyone." Economic calculations show that, despite what backers assert, BPL will be subject to the same economic constraints as other broadband technology in terms of connections per mile versus costs per mile. If BPL ever gets deployed, it will get deployed in the same areas where broadband service is already provided, or will be provided, by existing technologies such as cable modem and DSL.

There's an outstanding Broadband over Power Lines FAQ that is really required reading for anyone who wants to debate knowledgeably about the issues, rather than just troll for arguments. It is, of course, written from a rebuttal perspective, but it goes to great lengths to explain the answers with objective technical and political justifications.

In particular:

Q: Why are some Hams so emotional in their opposition to BPL?

Q: If this just affects Ham Radio, why should anyone care?

Q: Won't BPL be different than Cable and DSL and deliver broadband to those who don't have it, especially in rural areas?

Q: To date, have any US BPL systems been shut down due to interference?

Q: To date, have any BPL systems been deactivated due to business reasons?

There are serious issues with BPL. It generates interference that compromises several amateur radio bands, and is likewise interfered with by the legal operation of numerous low-power transmitters. (This includes CB radio transmitters as well as ham radio transmitters.)

I think that the 5 people who this will negatively impact will be rendered insignificant by the thousands that it would benefit. It's the same argument that people use to negate the complaints of Mac users, except hams are a MUCH MUCH smaller percentage of the population.

(waits for inevitable ham flames)

I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I do want to rebut the assertion in the parent posting that BPL is a technology that is "inevitably going to be made available to everyone." Economic calculations show that, despite what backers assert, BPL will be subject to the same economic constraints as other broadband technology in terms of connections per mile versus costs per mile. If BPL ever gets deployed, it will get deployed in the same areas where broadband service is already provided, or will be provided, by existing technologies such as cable modem and DSL.

There's an outstanding Broadband over Power Lines FAQ that is really required reading for anyone who wants to debate knowledgeably about the issues, rather than just troll for arguments. It is, of course, written from a rebuttal perspective, but it goes to great lengths to explain the answers with objective technical and political justifications.

In particular:

Q: Why are some Hams so emotional in their opposition to BPL?

Q: If this just affects Ham Radio, why should anyone care?

Q: Won't BPL be different than Cable and DSL and deliver broadband to those who don't have it, especially in rural areas?

Q: To date, have any US BPL systems been shut down due to interference?

Q: To date, have any BPL systems been deactivated due to business reasons?

There are serious issues with BPL. It generates interference that compromises several amateur radio bands, and is likewise interfered with by the legal operation of numerous low-power transmitters. (This includes CB radio transmitters as well as ham radio transmitters.)

I think that the 5 people who this will negatively impact will be rendered insignificant by the thousands that it would benefit. It's the same argument that people use to negate the complaints of Mac users, except hams are a MUCH MUCH smaller percentage of the population.

(waits for inevitable ham flames)

I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I do want to rebut the assertion in the parent posting that BPL is a technology that is "inevitably going to be made available to everyone." Economic calculations show that, despite what backers assert, BPL will be subject to the same economic constraints as other broadband technology in terms of connections per mile versus costs per mile. If BPL ever gets deployed, it will get deployed in the same areas where broadband service is already provided, or will be provided, by existing technologies such as cable modem and DSL.

There's an outstanding Broadband over Power Lines FAQ that is really required reading for anyone who wants to debate knowledgeably about the issues, rather than just troll for arguments. It is, of course, written from a rebuttal perspective, but it goes to great lengths to explain the answers with objective technical and political justifications.

In particular:

Q: Why are some Hams so emotional in their opposition to BPL?

Q: If this just affects Ham Radio, why should anyone care?

Q: Won't BPL be different than Cable and DSL and deliver broadband to those who don't have it, especially in rural areas?

Q: To date, have any US BPL systems been shut down due to interference?

Q: To date, have any BPL systems been deactivated due to business reasons?

Some research:

• FAQ
• ARRL explanation
• Previous discussion on /.
• Blog commentary
• EHam "Call to Action"

There are other issues, but that one is by far the most contentious as shortwave communications would be disrupted - and that's bad.

PPL has about six areas; they are a couple blocks each. A list of BPL locations in the US is here.

Here's a good FAQ on BPL:

http://www.qrpis.org/~k3ng/bpl.html

73 de w7com

Mostly from ARRL and talking with other hams that have played with it. I'd suggest checking out eham.net or qrz.net but they are mostly bitchy old farts that think all the worlds problems were caused by the Clintons. The real expert on this is Ed Hare (w1rfi)at ARRL. He'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Oh, and here's a good FAQ:
http://www.qrpis.org/~k3ng/bpl.html

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/47cf r15_04.html

This part sets out the regulations under which an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator may be operated without an individual license.

Sec. 15.5 General conditions of operation.

(a) Persons operating intentional or unintentional radiators shall not be deemed to have any vested or recognizable right to continued use of any given frequency by virtue of prior registration or certification of equipment, or, for power line carrier systems, on the basis of prior notification of use pursuant to Sec. 90.63(g) of this chapter.
(b) Operation of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is subject to the conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that interference must be accepted that may be caused by the operation of an authorized radio station, by another intentional or unintentional radiator, by industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment, or by an incidental radiator.

http://www.qrpis.org/~k3ng/ham_wisp.html

Long story short, if you think someone is interferring with your wireless service, too bad. You're only recourse is to complain to the FCC and say the the offending party is operating outside of Part 15 (or whatever part may apply). I.E. - they are transmitter too much power. Commercial interest doesn't mean anything since you're an unlicensed user.

Hams get the neat ability to modify their equipment to pump out more power and use better/stringer/faster toys. (Legally)

This is also true when using cantennas.

Read up here for the commercial aspects:
http://www.michwave.com/bbnetwork/faq/fcc.htm

Here for the amateur side:
http://www.qrpis.org/~k3ng/ham_wisp.html

In order to be charged with `posession of drug paraphernalia' it must be provable that the object in question has been used in conjunction with illegal drugs.

And even if the law agrees with you, the police, judge and jury may not. `Honest officer, this bong, er, water pipe is only for tobacco!'

BTW in topics like this it rocks to be an amatuer radio operator. I can amplify that signal AND feed it into a high gain antenna, provided I do not cause interference to anyone else.

But the bigger issue is that you also need to follow the ham rules -- ID yourself every 10 minutes, no commercial traffic, no encryption, etc. And unless your system is smart enough to automatically limit itself to the power strictly needed, your power limit is just one watt. (But at least they will let you put your one watt into a big honking high-gain antenna.)

Let some fuckwad cop tell me I have an "illegal" antenna!

BPL FAQ for those wanting a primer on the technology, the issues, and the locations where it's operating.

It is a long read, but this is probably the best explination of the issue (focus on technical aspects) that I have found.

Finkployd

This may not be the same thing...data rates in excess of 1 Gigabit require bandwidth in excess of 2 GigaHertz. The BPL that is causing radio users (such as hams and public safety and other users) such fits uses the spectrum from roughly 2 to 70 MHz. That's 68MHz wide and can carry roughly 38 Megabits per power line.

If the power company solution used a frequency range that was entirely contained within the multi-GHz band, for example, there would be no interference in the critical "high frequency" 3-30Mhz spectrum that has special properties of world-wide propagation due to the ionosphere.

So let's not rush to judgement on all network technologies that could be deployed on power lines...those that use microwave or UHF frequencies might not have the same interference problems.

The ARRL does not have opposition to all technology -- just those that have been shown to be problematic and the problems swept under the rug by the FCC.

I also understand that Hams can broadcast up to 200 Watts on these fgrequencies.

Wi-Fi is considered "encoded" by the FCC, so my Tech (HAM) license gets me nada - zip - nothing.

We need to change this silly reg - atleast some classes of HAMs should be able to broadcast Wi-Fi at increased power levels.

AD5RH

There's a bit more to it than that. While we hear alot about amateur radio being affected, and the amount of concern being voiced, it goes well beyond the HAM operators.

The affected radio spectrum is quite broad, and the amount of spectrum allocated to the amateur service (HAMS) is only a small part. In the same bands are various other services including a large amount of commercial and government frequency allocations. They will not be immune to the interference potential that has been tested and measured by the amateur radio community in the various trial areas.

Let me add that HAMS aren't opposed to BPL just to be difficult, but because there are numerous problems with the technology and there are other good (better) but underdeveloped alternatives. The field trials done so far have shown that it is very difficult to eliminate harmful interference to the areas of the radio spectrum involved.

For more information about BPL and the concerns of amateur (and by extension other) radio services, see this FAQ; it is perhaps the best discussion of BPL and the issues around it I have read. Also, you can check the ARRL, which has a very good discussion of the topic.

I would further note that those like me who pursue the amateur radio hobby are not unlike many of those who read slashdot, who pursue computers as not just a profession, but also as a hobby. I have seen many argue about changes to computing platforms that would restrict or possibly eliminate our abilities to pursue the computing hobby (e.g., palladium).

Which is all well and good, but there's this passage (in the `1 watt' link given above) --

if transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 6 dBi are used the peak output power from the intentional radiator shall be reduced below the stated values in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, as appropriate, by the amount in dB that the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi.

Now, there is a way out. The ham rules don't have the same restrictions on antennas, and there is some overlap between the ham bands and the WiFi 2.4 gHz band, so you could go that way, but if you go under the ham rules, you have to follow all the ham rules, like those about IDing yourself, no encryption, no bad language, no monetary interest, etc.

It wouldn't surprise me if there's a lot of hams in the group of people trying to get long range WiFi links going for things like this -- but I know that a lot of the people trying aren't hams, and I'll bet that even the ones that are hams aren't all following the ham rules (though they should know better.)

This link talks about wirelss ISPs co-existing with hams in the 2.4 gHz band. It's somewhat relevant, and may be interesting reading.

But only with a license.

I'm assuming they're unlicensed.

Obviously there are, but what are those limits?

As for encryption, it's only the ham rules (part 97) that prohibit encryption. They also require that you ID yourself at the end of each message (and at least every 10 minutes) and that the usage be non-commercial. The FCC itself doesn't frown upon encryption, at least not publically.

I guess I need to read up on my FCC rules

As previously covered at Slashdot here... The Federal Emergency Management Agency submitted comments to the FCC stating their desire to not see BPL go into widespread implementation. Apparently it interferes with high frequency radio transmissions which are used by FEMA and others (think HAM radio operators). You can see FEMA's comments and a FAQ on the objections (slanted towards the HAM radio operators) here Forgot to add that in these post-9/11 times, it will be interesting to see who wins, Dept. of Homeland Security and their paranoia over infrastructure or the free-market wheelers and dealers at the FCC who think regulation is for the birds.

There's isn't a biological threat from BPL, but the interference issues are very real.

Here's a BPL and Amateur Radio FAQ.

Here or if that gets Slashdotted, here