Slashdot Mirror
Broadband Over Power Lines: Coming Soon?
Decaffeinated Jedi writes "With technology improving and costs droppings, News.com offers up an interesting report on renewed interest in delivering broadband Internet access via power lines (a technology known as BPL). Earlier this month, the Federal Communications Commission proposed a new set of rules for utility companies that might want to offer BPL services as a way to 'encourage broadband for the entire United States' -- particularly hard-to-reach rural areas. As the article notes, EarthLink has already started testing BPL service in using power lines leased in Wake County, North Carolina. Could cable and DSL face a new competitor in the broadband market in the near future?"
Has there been any information released about the potential costs to the consumers for this service? I haven't heard anything other than Earthlink's $39.95/month (which isn't much cheaper than what I currently pay for cable). The only way cable and DSL will face any competition from BPL is if BPL is cheaper. Why pay for BPL if it's not cheaper or at least offers more bandwidth for the same price as cable or DSL?
The guitars sound good, now give me about 10db more on the cow bell.
Could cable and DSL face a new competitor in the broadband market in the near future?"
I doubt it.
However, if it decreases the market share, then I hope that will mean good things for all of us, lower rates. And that would be a good thing.
Sent from your iPad.
Seems like this would be a great thing. How often has your power gone out versus your cable/dsl line. Power companies are uber-dedicated to providing power to their customers 24/7. And when the power is out they are all over it right away... unlike the cable company.
Are you Corn Fed?
I assume BPL will take off in areas where cable modem/dsl aren't yet available. This will get the ball rolling. In these areas when Cable and DSL finally get there they will have some difficulty knocking out the incumbent.
THEN- with some success/captial under its belt BPL will eventually start running specials and deals trying to under cut Cable/DSL in areas where those are already available.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
The problems that BPL causes are probably more serious than is good for a new technology. The problem of BPL causing a lot of interference with other services using a similar frequency spectrum have caused pretty much all major players who field-tested the technology in Germany to abandon it again. On the other hand, BPL technology is creeping into the airwaves through the backdoor anyway, as there are now more and more home-networking solutions using powerlines.
- Who pays to install the infrastructure? If it's the rate-payers, this will be a non-starter.
- Who pays for the hardware at the customer end?
- Why does the FCC seem to ignore the frequency problems?
So, the proposal is to have mega-monopolies managing more infrastructure, delivering service that's not in their core area, and requiring huge infrastructre changes?Hmm. Why does this look bad? Especialy when the local power company has a horrible reputation for maintaining their existing power infrastructure. I think I'll pass on this one.
Yeah, it does trample HAMs and other FEMA frequencies. It doesn't help that they don't shield the wires from RF, so basically if there's any transmission across it, it blasts anyone for miles. Pretty stupid if you ask me. Now if they bothered to shield the wiring (likely event), then it might be worthwhile to consider. Unfortunately, that would never happen. Not really a practical solution.
-- Friends don't let friends buy Nokia.
Since BPL tramples on other RF applications, it suggests that one could sniff the packets. It looks like the adapters (like this one) do use encryption, but it is only 56-bit DES. Given that these connections are always-on, I wonder how long it would take to accumulate enough data to break the code. And if you know the email address of the victim, could one send a structured email that helps uncover the key?
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
And the people receiving your signal are... Hopefully not in an area with BPL?
Try to use a telephone (even a cell phone) after a disaster such as a hurricane or tornado. Even the terrorist of 9/11 has shown that phones cannot be relied upon.
Ham radio on the other hand only needs an antenna (A simple piece of wire can do that) and some type of power source such as a running car or generator.
Yes, the telephone works 98% of the time but when it fails for the 2%, it is nice to have something to fall back on.
Okay, so you say you are valuable during emergency situations, but if the power was out, then there would be no interference with your signals. So you could still be used during emergencies.
Half of the reason we are useful in emergencies is that we practice and rehearse during non-emergency times. Without practice, our emergency operations would be disorganized and ineffective.
It's the same way with athletes. If a basketball player doesn't play basketball during the off-season, their performance will be seriously reduced when the season starts again.
Next is that we currently are implementing push-to-talk over GSM and CDMA that would easily remove the need for the emergency bands already used. Same applies as above, when the power it down, your radios will work again.
The problem with push-to-talk (and cell phones in general) is that it is centralized, just like the rest of the phone system. Under heavy load, it tends to fail.
Not necessarily. phone line != DSL availability. DSL is only useful/available if you are within something like 15000 feet of the CO. beyond that, the signal is weak and unstable, and even so the bandwidth that far out is not worth the effort.
;) and besides, its too expensive.
Where I live, there is no such thing as DSL, nor Cable broadband. Hell, I cant even get an ISDN line because the equipment where I am is not set up to support it. (at least thats what the phone company has told me after repeated attempts to get one installed)
Now, on the one hand BPL could theoretically bring that to my house, or as one way goes, at least close enough to my house that a WAP can get the bandwidth the rest of the way to my LAN. BUT on the other hand, in the US at least, it is still in the bare testing stages, AND is NOT a licensed device.
As an amateur radio operator, I have been following this closely. The FCC rules do NOT make any part 15 changes, and in fact order BPL providers to provide a quickly searchable index of all equipment, AND provide ways to shut segments down remotely, AND to immediately cut the BPL signal off should someone on a licensed frequency complain.
So, lets say this rolls out, and I as an FCC licensed radio operator attempt to contact someone on a freq below 30MHz, but instead get nothing but RFI from the currently operating BPL system in my area. In that case, according to the FCC proposed rules, the BPL provider would have to ceace any and all BPL transmissions upon my notifying them of interference, until such time as they can fix the issue and eliminate the RFI. And that doesnt have to come from an Amateur Radio op either.
The local police use VHF here, but they also share HF freqs for paging and local comms with the Fire/EMS depts. not to mention the HF freqs licensed to FEMA and other emergency agencies.
Honestly, where I am, the only viable broadband would be satellite, but the latency on a bidirectional satellite connection would prevent me from playing games...
Ya need to keep in mind that the majority of people MAY live in or around major cities, but BPL is not meant for that use... it was meant as a cheap means of getting broadband out to RURAL areas where the popluation is not as concentrated. The tests are in major cities because of convenience, and in part because the power companies are hoping that by running it on underground cables, they can make a case that there is no real RFI issue.
But in any case, the FCC has made a proposal for rulemaking, it is still open to discussion/review/input from the public (or will be soon) and there is still a lot of discussion before anything becomes concrete.
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
But the interference will prevent people from entering the field altogether. It will prevent people from being able to use their Federally Licensed Privelege to the Spectrum, and so emergency services (amongst other things) will suffer.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
Luke Stewart makes millions selling this idea to congress
The concept is a bad one. It's impractical. The people who say they have the technology never do.
You've been had.
I don't recall the ARRL trying to block cable Internet or DSL. Those technologies did not threaten to interfere with huge swaths of radio frequencies. I don't recall the ARLL trying to block satellite Internet access, even though there are amateur satellites. Again: they coexist peacefully. BPL, though, as yet, has not proven itself not to.
Yes, that's what tests are for. But the ARRL wants to make sure that their concerns (the concerns of their *members*) are on record. If they are addressed, then *everyone* is happy, including the ARRL members in the sticks who will benefit from both clear Amateur Radio communications as well as high-speed Internet access.
KC8PWV
Linux IT Consulting and Domino Development in Michigan
First of all, I am a licensed Ham..but for the sake of the argument I am taking off my ham hat. While a majority of hams think that we have a signifigant say in what goes on...we really don't. Anyways...moving right along... I am still in shock that the FCC has allowed BPL to prevail. Especially with the number of entities opposing it...Comercial Broadcasters (TV, FM radio, AM Radio and shortwave), The military (they still use HF), The coast guard (all vessels over a certain length are required to have a HF radio), the Airline industry, FEMA, and local public safety (yes some Police, Fire and EMS crews use VHF low-band still), oh an yeah us hams. Just goes to show you how much powrer lobby groups have (but thats an issue for another article).
Okay, so you say you are valuable during emergency situations, but if the power was out, then there would be no interference with your signals. So you could still be used during emergencies.
This has been covered at nauseum and good examples were pointed out. Fact of the matter is, HAMs, since you mentioned them, are all voluntary. If I cant use my new HF radio when I want to, I certainly am NOT going to shell out several hundred bucks for it, which means I wont be able to call the (insert emergency agency here) to come save your ass when (insert disaster here) happens.
Next is that we currently are implementing push-to-talk over GSM and CDMA that would easily remove the need for the emergency bands already used. Same applies as above, when the power it down, your radios will work again.
Really? I was under the impression that those require such things as an infrastructure. so, what good is your PTT going to do when the towers come down due to tornadoes or a major hurricaine?
What if the power is down for several weeks? those towers that pass the messages along dont power themselves...
GSM and such are nice tech, but not 100% reliable. I, however, can take a small simple tranciever, powered by a single 9v battery, and talk across the country for a month. (well, maybe only about 2-3 weeks before a battery change).
There are environmental advantages to this in that we can have less cables stretched all over the US saving in wire costs and insulation materials.
And far more environmental advantage in replacing the existing cable/telephone system with fiber. Then you can get all the phone/broadband/televisions you want, all delivered over a single line.
Lets just accept that we are going to have to step on toes to make this happen.
Sure... but why step on the wrong toes? There are far better ways to bring broadband to rural areas than PLC/BPL. Hell, with the pervasiveness of cell phones now, you could cover a LOT just by placing WAPs on existing cell towers.
How much are you valuing your ability to use a radio over the ability of a rural community to have Internet access for their children, education, and entertainment?
Well, oddly enough, it is EXACTLY those rural communities, that often do NOT have much in the way of emergency equipment/supplies, do not have much in the way of trained emergency response personnel, and do not have much in the way of any sort of emergency communications system that NEED things like HF communications. There were very large portions of NC in 2002 that relied SOLELY on HAM operators for all their communications. In fact, in many cases, HAMs were the police/fire/ems comms, plus comms to emergency shelters, supply depots, and liason between civilian and military units.
Oh well, there are more important things to worry about, I guess... because everyone deserves streaming pr0n.
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
needs of the many?
With all due respect, the internet isn't exactly a 'need', much less broadband. It's a 'want', sure, but not 'need'.
Allow me to note a problem that the non-ham geeks will care about. Those cool atomic clock watches and gadgets? They don't really have an atomic clock in them. They work by getting radio signals from WWV. If you have BPL in your neighborhood, you can say goodbye to those clocks.
Of course, there are always sundials...
A much better approach is to take the intelligent route. Don't act like a soccer mom in an SUV, trampling over everyone else just because you can, but rather appeal to their better senses. Tell them, "You don't want this because it will interfere with emergency services." That will get them on your side, not some sort of macho man attitude.
I, for one, could care less about Ham radio, but I do care about emergency services. If BPL will interfere with those, then I would be willing to oppose it. On the other hand, when I see a bunch of arrogant Hams trumping up their frequency rights, I feel like signing up for BPL tomorrow.
The coolest FUD in that artice is "than whats possible with Fiber" They completely forgot to use the proper wording "than whats currently possible"... we have only begun to tap the bandwidth available over fiber networks... We are starting to fool around with changing the state of photons for cripe sake... the bandwidth potential is nearly unlimited..
Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
It's bad enough that our 2.4 gig band is already saturated by wifi, cordless phones and microwave ovens...or half our 220 band was taken from us and then hardly used...or our 40 meter band is so overrun with high power SW broadcasters it's unusable...or our 10 meter band is half taken over by CBers running illegal high power on illegal frequencies...or that we have to be constantly vigilant that the rest of our UHF spectrum isn't taken away. NOW you want to destroy our entire HF spectrum too..along with short wave broadcasting. Don't any of you understand that power lines make great HF antennas? Or that at HF frequencies with an efficient antenna all you need is 100 milliwatts (.1 watt) to be heard across the world? Just imagine what THOUSANDS of these BPL transmitters running one watt or more will do to the shortwave bands worldwide! Plus, other countries use HF for broadcasting. Just because we happen not to here in the USA doesn't mean we have the right to destroy their radio stations with hash interference. Please...PLEASE...leave us alone for once!
I couldn't agree more wholeheartedly. Everything one could do with power line, one could also do with copper which is just like power lines only without the high voltage 60 or 50 Hz signal interferring, without the need to pass transformators and amplifiers both ways and with much better physical properties of the medium. The fiber networks on the other hand, are the real future for data transfers, where we could obtain almost limitless speeds of transmission, thousands of times faster than what's possible with copper, using the very photons, the quants of light itself, instead of the electricity.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Hmmm, Ok, I won't say it is them, but it is. Ooops, I said it. HAMs do provide emergency communications when normal telephones (including mobile phones) fail. For example during prolonged power outages (like after a hurricane, the local cell tower died after 12 hours, and I doubt the landlines would have lasted if the power had been out for 3 or 4 days).
Don't get me wrong, I live out in the boonies, and I can't get DSL or cable, I want BPL, but I wouldn't think losing the emergency communications services HAMs provide is worth it. I would rather lump it and wait for some sort of wireless that doesn't radiate all over the place (WiMax, or NetTel's thing, or...)