HomePNA Achieves 320Mbps With Copper 114
illeism writes "Ars Techinca is reporting that the HPNA has made a significant stride in copper speed. From the article: 'The HomePNA Alliance, backers of a networking spec that works over coaxial or twisted pair wiring, has announced the release of the HPNA 3.1 specification. The big news comes in the form of a speed jump from 128Mbps to 320Mbps, which pushes it above competing networking standards HomePlug AV and MoCA (Multimedia over Coax) for the title of fastest networking tech outside of gigabit Ethernet and makes it a more attractive option for triple-play providers.'"
What? (Score:2, Troll)
What was wrong with gigabit ethernet?
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re:What? (Score:4, Informative)
It requires CAT-6e certified twisted pair cables and wont run over existing house wiring.
GigE works fine over Cat5E wiring (Score:3, Informative)
I wouldn't recommend whole-house GigE with Cat5e. It might work, but only for a sufficiently small value of "house."
Re:GigE works fine over Cat5E wiring (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Was the demand at least SX?
Bleh. I'll get back to my C=116 [wikipedia.org] and cry in the dark.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yep. Gigabit over Cat 5e. Our entire house is wired up with the stuff.
I've maxed it out at 60MB/s before my CPU hit 100%.
Its not a small house either. The strech of cable my computer has to the server must be at least 10-15m long.
No packet loss, great ping and way too fast.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For us commoners with houses under 4,050 m^2 (40,000 ft^2)*, cat5e [wikipedia.org] works fine.
* numbers based on 90x45 meter single story house, centrally-located core switch/router, and 65% efficiency of cable pulls.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
The odds of having all the coax one needs already in the right places and all is every bit as remote as already having 6e everywhere.
Also, Gbit ethernet is becoming very popular (built on pretty much all motherboards nowadays - also means one less thing to
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Or Fiber to the Premisis? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
What was wrong with gigabit ethernet?
Each run being limited to a length of 100 meters?
Re: (Score:1)
I havent RTFM but I assume that this standard has the same 100m limitation.
The signal just grows too weak at long distances and when your transmitting at high speed you need all the signal you can get.
Re: (Score:2)
The article doesn't say, but it is capable of "up to 50 devices spread up to 1,000 feet apart on a single network". Whatever that means. The advantage this has is that it is capable of multispectrum operation?
Seems kinda redundant, since most new houses are being run with cat6 cable. I guess it would be more useful for older houses where retrofitting would be a pain.
Re: (Score:2)
In that case...
What is wrong with using fiber?
Re: (Score:2)
There aren't a lot of homes out there where that's going to be a problem.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But whats the latency? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Yeah, sometimes it's not easy, determining something to write that isn't immediately obvious or retarded, but if you take the challenge, you will be part of one of an elite million or two, who have threads on the first page.
Re: (Score:1)
Um, are you trying to claim that network latency has no effect on those things?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:But whats the latency? (Score:5, Informative)
While I obviously wouldn't use a home networking standard for ultra performance critical networking applications, the latency of HPNA 2.0 is not something I ever perceptually notice, and I use it every day.
Erm....? (Score:2)
Re:Erm....? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Are phone installations in such buildings generally 4-wire though? Since phones only use 2 wires, I've seen a lot of phone infastructure that only uses 2 wires...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Erm....? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The other two lines are traditionally used for a second line (or something else, like this HPNA technology). Power is modulated over the first pair (red/green) along with the voice signal. Google will enlighten you. If you only have one phone line, the black/yellow pair is totally unused.
Want more proof? (Assuming you only have one phone line in your house) Go out to the box where the phone comes into your house and you'll see that the black/yellow pair are either not connected to anything at
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Er, no. Not anymore:
... In the powered variation, Pins 2 and 5 (black and yellow) carry 24-volt, DC power. While the phone line itself supplies enough power for most telephone terminals, old telephone terminals with incandescent lights in them (such as the classic Western Electric Trimline) need more power than the phone line can supply. Typically, the power on Pins 2 and 5 comes from a
An RJ11 jack uses two of the six positions
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
So very, very wrong.
In a standard telephone wiring situation (RJ11 jacks, or the old non-modular jacks), the green and red wires are used for the first phone line. The yellow and orange are unused (or a second line). An easy way to remember the pairs are Christmas (green + red) and Halloween (yellow + orange).
There is no separ
Re:Erm....? (Score:5, Informative)
The phone is actually a single massive loop, which is terminated at the phone company central office. When the phone is on the hook, a very high voltage DC potential just sits there. When the phone rings, the central office sends an AC voltage over the DC carrier wave, which actuates the ringers in the phones. When the phone is picked up, the mic and headphone piece close the DC circuit. The Central office then detects the current (Which is very small compared to the voltage because it's being sent through kilometers of phone line) and switches to "off hook" mode.
Now, the reason this is at all relevant is DSL signals also live on this set of lines. That's why you need to install line filters in your house. HOWEVER, the DSL line can't be a low resistance device like the telephone, or your phone would be off the hook whenever you plugged your DSL modem in. Since the DSL modem would have to be a high impedance device capable of sustaining the massive DC voltage mentioned earlier, I know that 24VDC wouldn't hurt a DSL modem, and even in the worst case scenario of a 120VAC line connected directly to the phone (and why exactly would phone connectors be so tiny, with so little protection from electrocution or short circuits, if a 120VAC line voltage was present?), I'm pretty sure the DSL modem still wouldn't care, since the phone ringing voltage is about 90VAC. Some day I'll have to grab an old DSL modem and test my theory regarding the 120VAC, but I don't need to regarding the 24VDC. The line voltage used to test whether a phone is off the hook or not is about twice that.
Re: (Score:1)
All about the coax (Score:4, Insightful)
Bingo. I remember that my college had coax strung all over the place, mostly installed in the 70s and 80s, when CATV was still considered cool. (Actually, they had enough hardware to play at being their own cable TV company; in addition to giving you broadcast stations, there were even some "campus TV" stations with original programming, a scrolling bulletin-board, and campus radio-over-TV channel. They even had upstream-broadcasting amplifiers, so you could plug into any outlet with a special converter and broadcast live to the entire campus. *sigh* That was cool.) Since it was being installed at a time when much new construction was going on, there are a lot of places where coax goes and more recent computer network cables don't. Pulling new cable is an expensive proposition, and I think there could be a sizable niche market for any technology that allowed reasonably fast computer networking over existing cable TV coax.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re:UWB over coax (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Running data over that would be "fun".
A boon for twisted pair or coax (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I disagree with this. Try HPNA 2.0, it does absolutely work, even with less than ideal wiring. It's far superior to powerline networking in that sense, which claims completely unrealistic bandwidth numbers.
You may be right that in a really old home with really crappy wiring, it wouldn't work as well, but I've used HPNA in a couple of apartments with absolutely no problems.
Of course, this is all 10Mbps HPNA 2.0, because no mainstream manufacturers have ever s
Re: (Score:1)
This is a big house too and the wires went from one side of the house to the other on both stories.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They've been doing networking over coax since the 70/80's with the old digital equipment broadband stuff (which is the o
New Service in my Area (Score:5, Funny)
319Mbps download and 1Mbps upload for $99.99 per month.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I wonder if they realize that there are many VALID uses of upload bandwidth, such as remote access? VNC works like crap at 312...
Re: (Score:2)
Great but... (Score:4, Interesting)
HPNA 2.0 is great, but is 1) only 10Mbps, so not so impressive for higher bandwidth file transmission within my apartment and 2) no longer supported by ANY manufacturer because they mistakenly think that there is no demand due to wifi.
802.11b/g/a serve a totally different and complementary purpose to HPNA, which is great for bridging more distant rooms in a house or apartment that would cost thousands to properly wire for ethernet. Two 100 dollar bridges do the trick beautifully.
Powerline networking sucks in comparison - it was way overhyped and actual throughput is usually a fraction of the advertised throughput, whereas HPNA 2.0 worked exactly as promised and the PE102 boxes I use are so reliable it's sick.
I would absolutely love to see even a 50 or 100 Mbps HPNA standard that some manufacturer will support!
I agree. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, 2Wire has several gateway models with HPNA v3 and they'll no doubt adopt 3.1 soon enough.
Great, more alphabet soup (Score:2)
Prey tell, how many different acronyms can we cram into networking -- MoCA, PNA, triple-play?
Ethernet and TCPIP are more than enough internet unless you're trying to make a sandwich.
Since when... (Score:1)
Stop confusing me.. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Ouch, hope you used plenum rated cable.
Re: (Score:1)
One cable goes outside stapled to the bottom of a balcony for ~5m.
We got the electricians to do it along with some antenna coax, powerpoints and a few other things at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you have a BASEMENT (Score:1)
In California, we have a word for BASEMENT. It's: CONCRETE SLAB.
No attic, either. It's VERY hard to do that sort of thing here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
DSL and this use a different encoding scheme on the data using more modern techniques such as Frequency Division Multiplexing. Also I believe local loops have more bandwidth on the local loop, the lower rate for telephones was implemented for long distance hauls.
So while POTS is limited to 56k it has nothing to do with the wire, it has to do with the telepho
Re: (Score:2)
DSL and this use a different encoding scheme on the data using more modern techniques such as Frequency Division Multiplexing. Also I believe local loops have more bandwidth on the local loop, the lower rate for telephones was implemented for long distance hauls.
So while POTS is limited to 56k it has nothing to do with the wire, it has to do with the telepho
Re: (Score:1)
R = B log2 ( 1 + SNR ) - channel capacity equation
Change B for 3Khz (approx.) and SNR for 45 dB (min, IIRC), and you'll get your R = 56kbps. If you can't get that much SNR, you'll have a slower bitrate.
If, OTOH, you increase SNR and, especially, bandwidth, you'll get a higher bitrate. Laws of physics aren't broken; modern systems just use higher frequencies and more bandwidth than 300-3400 Hz.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Too expensive for consumer use, which is what this is supposed to be for?
For coaxial...docsis? (Score:2)
We have cable (rg6) run through every building up here, so maybe this would make a cheaper alternative to DOCSIS cable modems, to just put one in the basement, then some kind of HPNA switch/inserter?
Re: (Score:1)
Voice lines use a defined set of frequencies on the copper. There is a limit on what you can send/receive just using those frequencies.
DSL, HomePNA, etc. use different (higher) set of frequencies. These frequencies do not overlap with the voice frequencies. There are some disadvantages of course; telephone wires are typically relatively electrically noisy, so if you're trying to push large amount of data around you have to be able to handle the noise. The extra
Voltages, colour codes .... (Score:2)
The DC is 24V, which is not high voltage in anyone's world. The ring signal is a bit more, IIRC 120V AC which I have gotten zapped by once
An analogue phone line works entirely off the two wires, as many posters have noted the second pair is normally used for a second line, or is left open.
The red / black / green / yellow colour scheme is only used for
Re: (Score:2)
Where, and for how many millions do they sell?
Cat6 is no joke. This is not something your average building contractor can handle. It is harder to work with than fibre. Explaning the physical behaviour of the cable requires quantum physics (most of the energy travels outside the copper conductor, as an electromagnetic field). Everything has to be done precisely correctly. The way you handle the cable while pulling it. The order in whi
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Non, I just have to get up and be bright for day three in four hours, so I don't know why I'm on
Blerg.
Man, (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Second, the floorplan here is long and winding, and wiring it up with ethernet would be quite a project. I was being rhetorical when I said "I have no idea how to do it" - I simply mean that it is non-trivial for a normal, basic, semi-handy guy to do
Re: (Score:2)
CATV (Score:1)
The system was very simply but elegantly designed, though. There was a single "head end" with the various pieces of source equipment for the different channels, and the main amplifiers, which fed down to distribution amplifiers in the buildings.
What was cool -- and I don't know if this exists in most cable systems or was just something exotic -- was that the amplifiers scattered through the system ampl
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I call bullshit [tiaonline.org]. Namely, because of this part:
How can I determine the installation requirements for Cat 6 such as termination, minimum radius around corners, proximity to electrical devices (ballasts, wiring, etc.)?
The requirements for installation of Category 6 are essentially the same as the requirements for Category 5e. Installation practices are in the TIA-568-B.1 and TIA-569-A documents.
As long as you use hardware that is cat6 compliant, which has a small cost premium, you'll be fine
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
DSL modems use much higher freq
Solution without a problem. (Score:2)
This HomePNA stuff is niche-market, because almost nobody has a problem that can't already be solved with cheap existing technology. That means it will never enjoy the broad support that the mass-market technolog
When it comes to home networking... (Score:2)
When it comes to home (as opposed to office, dorm, high-performence) networking, cheap & easy is what'll win. I can forsee that the typical domestic home will choose networking over their powerlines. A "professional" installation might entail replacing the breaker box, with no need to run any wire at all.
Granted, home networking might use a bit of ethernet in places where it's desirable to have a high speed connection, but let's face it... The internet-enabled rice-cooker doesn't need to plug into t
Re:Erm....? (Score:2)
Nice one! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Now we've got Laser Discs, xDSL [wikipedia.org]. Occupies the same space, but in a very different way, and all digital.