BPL: The Internet's Fool's Gold 300
Joe Barr writes "One of the more fascinating tidbits of information I came across while researching this story on NewsForge about BPL, the fatally flawed wannabe-broadband-provider technology, was that at the very same time the FCC was downplaying the threat of the interference BPL creates, the FCC's very own test results were showing just the opposite."
Thank Slashdot as well (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Thank Slashdot as well (Score:5, Informative)
From Salon's article:
Re:Thank Slashdot as well (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Thank Slashdot as well (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Reed's ideas aren't even decent vaporware yet.
2) Reed's ideas are going to have problems with the fact that antennas aren't broadbanded enough. And when they are, they are directional (often the wrong ones), and still not very broadbanded. And don't think fractal antennas will work, because they don't work well at all.
3) Most important - his ideas have nothing to do with the HF section of the spectrum.
tom
K0TAR
Re:Interference is indeed fact... (Score:3, Informative)
BPL over quantum wires? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:BPL over quantum wires? (Score:3, Funny)
FCC favors business over public interest ?!? (Score:5, Interesting)
Where is the administration looking out for the public interest that I've become so accustomed to?!?
What's that you say? Someone from the White House told them to get broadband-over-power-lines through no matter what, even if it destroys HAM radio and other public-use frequencies through interference? Why on earth would anyone do that? There isn't any corruption or corporate favoritism in Washington, is there?!?
What do you mean lawyers outnumber engineers at the FCC by a near-infinite margin!?! How could that be so?!?
Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? (Score:2)
Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent wrote " My `public interest' would be nicely served by actually being able to get broadband. And I have power lines."
Which is why this stupid idea is so seductive. Everybody wants broadband, everybody has power lines. What's the problem?
(1) It doesn't work, and really can't work. (2) It has bad negative consequences for other systems (forget ham radio, and consider the emergency radio bands it overlaps). (3) Even if it did work, it would be more expensive and less available than current broadband channels.
I mean, everybody who wants broadband probably has water pipes, too. Why not broadband over tapwater? Pulse-modulate the chlorine and fluorine levels in the pipes, and read the bits right off there... BPL isn't much more sensible than BT when you look at it closely.
Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:IP over H2O (Score:3, Funny)
or, you could read TFA. (Score:5, Informative)
weird view of public interest (Score:2)
Someone should get them trillian
Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... (Score:4, Insightful)
It can transmit as well as receive.
There have been many attempts and sales of devices in the past which purports to use the entire power grid as an antenna, whose signals is routed through our special little box to your TV set, yours for only $19.95 postpaid, etc.
Yeh, you get the signal you wanted, as well as more crap you didn't than you can shake your stick at. Its like getting a free restaurant meal, thoroughly mixed with a bucket of garbage.
So, you put wide spectral content signal back into the power grid, you are gonna radiate our all over. This has been known since the days of Tesla and Marconi. Nothing new here.
We already have enough problem with accidental corona discharges filling the RF spectrum with unwanted broadband hash. Just one dirty insulator will screw up the RF environment for miles around.
Technically, yes, power lines could transmit data, but they were not optimized for this. Its old-style 300-ohm TV twin-lead at its best. It was notorious for picking up stray signals.
I do not think BPL was ever designed to send signals... it's designed like a cat trap, whose purpose is to trap investor dollars. Dollars from people quick to part with their money but slow to pick up the technical acumen to verify their claims.
One more thing, don't knock amateur radio HAMS. They are the last breed of guys we have who have a personal interest in RF. Most people seem as ignorant of their stuff as they are about their computers, and have no earthly idea how it works - as they just complain and pay someone else to make it work. Most amateur radio operators know exactly how their stuff works - especially if you ever meet one who builds from scratch. Its really unusual these days to talk to anyone who knows this field from its most fundamental levels, and their advice should be taken very seriously. Personally, I fear the passing of these guys who build things from the ground up, as many of the incoming people build things with dollars, and have no idea how it works - and physics, not finance, makes the ultimate decision of whether something will work or not.
Re:Public Interest? (Score:2)
No, just the FCC this time, really. Bush is just too easy of a target, that gets dull, why do it here? Though fingers do point at the administration backing BPL, now that you mention it.
Besides, it's not just HAM radio. There are other frequencies used for public safety and science which would likely see problems, too. It's just about what the article is about- the FCC ignoring science to push some business agenda.
Yes, the public is in
So help me out.... (Score:5, Interesting)
It wasnt clear to me in the article why the FCC was so high on the tech...
Re:So help me out.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Ethernet-over-Power would actually make some sense for the power companies themselves, as they'd be able to have "intelligent" power routing within the grid itself, rather than relying on someone at the power stations to hit the right buttons.
Typically, blackouts such as the one that struck the northeast US and Canada a while back are ca
Re:So help me out.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Offtopic to be sure, but the cause of the blackout in the northeast was actually a problem that shows up in lots of redundant systems (as shown in this simple basic program):
10 One grid failed
20 Another gr
Re:So help me out.... (Score:2)
Part of the problem is that high frequency signals are necessarily powerful signals and swamp anything useful being transmitted wirelessly. The other part of the problem is that the power grid is an untuned circuit, which means you have broadcasts on a very wide range of frequenci
Re:So help me out.... (Score:3, Informative)
Because the law requires some competition to be permitted, Powell chose to emphasize "intermodal" competition. In other words,
Re:So help me out.... (Score:2)
Line Noise... What now... (Score:4, Insightful)
Never underestimate the power of corruption (Score:5, Insightful)
http://powermarketers.netcontentinc.net/newsreade
A few BPL trials have been dropped because the technology just cannot compete. But the threat is still real. Once fixed wireless is available everywhere, BPL
technology's only hope of success is through open graft and bribery.
My hope would be that Texans would give their much-abused highway signs a break from using them for target practice and begin utilizing the numerous BPL devices that will be
available. But old habits die hard.
Broadband over Powerlines bad? Shocking! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Broadband over Powerlines bad? Shocking! (Score:2)
Re:Broadband over Powerlines bad? Shocking! (Score:2)
Yeah, I know. We are out of coffee here at the office and I just can't think straight.
Laugh Test (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:5, Informative)
We're not just talking about ignorance - which can be excused in Government, as it's almost mandatory - we are in the realms of willful stupidity, as the results were known in advance.
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Household power is 60 cycles per second in the US, 50 in the UK; so, not much of a difference. Of course, I have no idea if the overhead transmission wires also use those same frequencies.
For comparison, the radio frequency bands begin a lot higher, about 530,000 cycles per second (530KHz) for the AM broadcast band.
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Probably not. It isn't the 50-60 Hz frequency range that are the problem, it's the frequencies above that (which are used to carry data) that are the problem. The electrical grid is essentially a big, noisy, broadcast antenna. That's fine when you're only transmitting a na
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:3, Informative)
The wavelength of any broadband is so minute, compared to ehter the 50 Hz o
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Absolutely! We can only assume that the power providers were so desperate to jump on the dot-com bandwagon that the MBAs overpowered the EEs.
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
With a fraction of the power and a piece of wire an emergency or ham operator can talk to the rest of the world. A pollution of the entire shortwave spectrum will endanger all kinds of communication that relies on it: Military, Emergency, Aviation, Traffic, Navigation.
Worldwide, since shortwaves do not stop at a nation's border.
Re:Laugh Test (Score:5, Interesting)
However, even in the UK, there's a problem- the street lights are run off the mains too. So you have a whole row of transmitters all neatly lined up. Gah. Presumably it's possible to put a filter on each and every one at ground level, but it's fairly expensive I guess.
I talked to some of the guys that worked for Nortel on it, they were very enthusiastic, and seemed to think it would work.
One problem they got around was the streetlights again. At UK lighting up time, all the streetlights turn on, something like: blink, blinkety-blink, blink blink blink, on. Now each blink throws a whole mess of noise on the mains. And you have a whole street full of them. Essentially, the internet connection would go down for a minute or two everyday at lighting up time :-)
I think they changed their filtering or shortened the packet size or something, and the problem mostly went away... But it was funny.
Still, I don't see powerline internet really taking off, never did.
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:3, Interesting)
It is expensive to provide high-quality, robust Internet service. The physical transmission medium is about the least important/interesting part of it. Wipi
What if... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:What if... (Score:2)
I just got back from an EMC lab where they were testing emissions from a device using POE. The device was failing all over the place and the tech said this was a common problem they were seeing with POE.
Re:What if... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What if... (Score:2)
I thought the point of twisting, twisting pairs at least, was to help reject incomming signals, not prevent signal emission.
Re:What if... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What if... (Score:2)
Dropping it left and right (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Dropping it left and right (Score:2)
Well, who else uses the HF spectrum these days? Everybody but the hams have moved to satellite.
Now if we could get Family Radio and a few of the other Christian shortwave broadcasters to petition the White House, I'd expect that would do the trick. BPL would be gone tomorrow, based on the Bush Administrat
Cincinnati BPL (Score:5, Informative)
According to the section chief [enquirer.com] of the Ohio ARRL, problems are minimal.
(at the bottom of the article:) "Joe Phillips of Fairfield, the Ohio section chief for the American Radio Relay League, says that so far the Cinergy roll-out hasn't created the radio interference many ham radio operators had feared."
Re:Cincinnati BPL (Score:3, Interesting)
As far as "last mile" technology goes... (Score:4, Interesting)
The satts need dialup, right now. Someone fucking work on that. If your option is no-fucking-intarweb-at-all, 800ms pings don't look all that bad. Especially when you can pull 100k/s downloads, and even 10k/s uploads. Beggars can't be choosers.
The blimps look pretty decent. I'd like to couple that with a small (18" diameter) enclosed antenna. Probably not optical, because it's more prone to atmospheric disturbance (rain). I'm thinking 20ghz, or something really funky like 100ghz. Something that really cuts through the chop.
I'm no electrical engineer, but if it was my call to make, that's the shit I'd have them working on...
Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies (Score:2, Informative)
Yes, BPL interferes with Ham frequencies. But the FCC allocated emergency ranges are in fact higher on the RF spectrum, and are *not*, repeat *not* in any danger from BPL interference. Sure, it's not a great thing that Ham could be wiped out, but could the advocates please be honest stop trying to pretend that it'll hindre all emergency service communication in the process?
Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies (Score:2)
Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies (Score:3, Informative)
Anything for another broadband provider (Score:4, Insightful)
Like many other cable providers, they block off vital TCP/IP ports. No incoming port 80 for my web server - no way do the corporations want us to turn into producers on the internet, the corporations only want us to be consumers of their own content. Blocked outgoing port 25, crippling my mail server - naturally, only corporations should be allowed to send e-mail
Re:Anything for another broadband provider (Score:2, Informative)
With the increase of SPAM on the Internet, providers are being more strict with other ISPs that fail to police their IP space for open relays and viruses. A single spammer from one of your netblocks is often enough to get ALL of your net blocks black listed by other ISPs. As a result ISP's are being forced to restrict outbound access t
Stupid Idea! (Score:2, Insightful)
Poorly argued paper (Score:3, Informative)
Later he agrees that competition would be good for the consumer, but that BPL is not being faster, more reliable, or cheaper than conventional broadband access. But, he leave out the part about it being faster and more reliable than no access at all. Although I'll admit that BPL probably costs more than having no access at all. Finally he begins to selectively quote and reference FCC documents. He talks of notching and quotes a member of the ARRL (association for amateur radio) of which the author is also a member. The FCC data that he claims show that the likelihood of interference is not very low, actually shows the opposite for a properly notched systems. The report showed low to no interference with a an above ground properly notched system simply recommend that the notch be increase by 100kHz in the 10 meter band.
And for underground powerline systems, there were no caveats at all - the underground systems were always below the limit.
Why claim that the data proves something that it doesn't?
http://www.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/FCC_reports.pd [arrl.org]f
BPL and Amateur Radio (Score:5, Informative)
It really is a silly idea. Let's run MF/HF/VHF signals over this really long, unshielded wire to deliver internet to people's houses. Of course we can't actually get it to the house because of those pesky transformers, so we still need to retrofit our grid and use something else (like wifi) for the last 100 yards. Then there's that pesky issue of power lines being really bad transmission lines at those high frequencies (they're definately not constant impedence), so we'll have to throw a lot of power into those lines (at RF) to get the signal where we want it. What? It radiates? Hum, oh well.
The obvious solution is to string real transmission lines (like coax, twisted pair, or, obviously, fiber) along those poles (protected in some kind of harder casing) and underground. But that's expensive? Duh, retrofitting something meant to deliver huge amounts of energy at one frequency (50 or 60Hz, depending on your side of the pond) to deliver data at high rates of speed isn't going to be cheap. At least don't be half-assed about it.
Also, just so people know. The amateur service doesn't really have all the bandspace people make it out to have. Some bands are surprisingly small: the voice section of 17m, for example, is from 18.110MHz to 18.168MHz - only 58kHz of bandwidth, or enough for 20 single-sideband voice conversations if everyone plays *really* nice and lines up perfectly. There are giant posters like this one [doc.gov] that show the major service to which each frequency band is allocated to in the US (many of which are also assigned internationally by ITU, at least down in HF). The first 3 rows (3kHz-30MHz) are the bands likely to be given problems by BPL. The amateur service is teal-green colored on that poster. Look for yourself how little is actually given to the service on many bands. 80m (3.5MHz) is about the only one that you're likely to even spot quickly below 30MHz!
BPL was a scam to begin with (Score:3, Informative)
In the past, FCC required local owners of cable and phone infrastructure (baby-Bells, Verizons of the world, etc) to share access to their wires in a non-discriminatory fashion to avoid "monopolistic" behaviour. Both local DSL and cable operators lobbied heavily and successfully to strike this "mandatory non-discriminatory sharing" provision from FCC rules. BPL was proclaimed a "third alternative broadband technology" that in theory should prevent monopoly or duopoly in residential broadband. The trick is that BPL is not competitive with cable or DSL and, thus, will unlikely be deployed at all. BPL push in FCC was a smoke-screen to enable baby-Bells to monopolize DSL and existing cable owners to monopolize cable broadband accordingly.
Underground cables (Score:2)
When I first visited North America, the third world standard ungodly cable mess strung next to all the roads was quite unexpected to me.
I find it hard to fathom how the power companies could even have considered using BPL in overhead lines - plain schtoopidttt...
What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clods! (Score:4, Interesting)
... other than a 56k modem?
I challenge those who've been ranting about the technology to stop for a minute, put yourself in my shoes, and see how you like it. Or how you don't.
I live in a somewhat rural area in central Virginia near Charlottesville. I'm way, way beyond the 15,000 cable foot requirement for DSL so that's out. There is no cable TV within 5 miles or more. And the only company offering wide area Wifi is a no go; I tried but couldn't get any signal because there are hills all around (10 million tons of granite equates to many hundreds of db in attenuation). (I'm also technically within the National Radio Quiet Zone [google it if you never heard of it] which makes additional wide-area wifi towers problematic).
My electric provider (a rural co-op) has a trial of BPL going right now and they're promising to roll it out to more customers soon. Initial testing on the trial has apparently been good, though I don't know how much attention has been paid to local hams and the impact on them.
If you're gonna diss my only broadband option, at least gimme some home for an alternative (other than moving)!!!
Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo (Score:5, Informative)
Haha! I hate to be the one to tell you this, but even if BPL is rolled out to 99% of the world, you will be in the 1% that won't ever get it.
ISDN, T-1, Satellite, dual-line dial-up. You have a lot of options for broadband, they just don't happen to be terribly cheap. If I was in your place, I would probably start up a broadband company, based on microwave transmitters/recievers.
But the real issue here is that having broadband is nice, but far from necessary. And HAMs aren't just kids playing around with several thousands of dollars worth of radio equipment, they serve an important role. It's BPL that is stomping all over other radio signals, not the other way around, and it should not be rolled out until/unless they can solve that problem.
"Dear Slashdot, I live on a coral island in the middle of the Pacific ocean, and the only way for me to get broadband is to drain all the water out of the ocean, but those damn environmentalists keep trying to stop me."
Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo (Score:3, Insightful)
I got a T1 -- you can get these most anyplace a phone line can be ran nowadays.
Sure, it might not be as cheap as you'd like, but you do have options. And two-way satellite works reasonably well for general surfing and email, too.
Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo (Score:3, Informative)
But more to the point, BROADBAND OVER POWER LINES DOESN'T WORK. There. Read it once again if you didn't get it th
BPL FAQ (Score:3, Informative)
Re:BPL? (Score:5, Informative)
Speaking of which - why arent the power companies themselves pushing for more active enforcement of the telecommunications act of 1996 regarding this issue? This seems like a perfect place to call it out - lines sold to utilities at forced wholesale prices could A) make them some money, B) hurt the telcos and C) make consumers happy.
Re:BPL? (Score:2)
Re:BPL? (Score:2, Interesting)
In this part of the world they are. Many have installed their own fiber on the power poles, for control & metering, and are selling the spare bandwidth. One [wiredcountry.co.nz] thought they could do "fiber to transformer" then BPL. They soon found the error of their choice and now are struggling to fit demand into their backup wireless spectrum.
As for BoG, one mainly electricity utility here inherited some abandoned gas pipes thru the city. They've pulled a lot of fib
Re:BPL? (Score:2)
Re:BPL? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:BPL? (Score:2)
here in quebec (north, you know, canada) Hydro Quebec have a full fledged fiber network. There's also Hydro One (aka, Hydro Ontario) that actually resells full transit to the public in at least one data center that i know of. and let me tell you, for anything over 5mbit/s they're about half the price of everyone else (80$/mbit/s with a 10mbi
Re:Realistically (Score:5, Insightful)
So if the fire department using 20th century radios is unable to communicate and your house burns down is that OK with you?
BPL is flawed technology trying to be rammed down people's throats. Those nerdy hams were just the first to see the wolf in sheep's clothing thats all.
Man Holmes
Lies, damned lies. (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, and consider the full area of a horse field compared to the itty bitty teeny little slice of processed asphalt bisecting it - you get the tiny piece, the horse gets the remainder.
Your analogy isn't exactly waterproof.
Re:Realistically (Score:3, Insightful)
You're funny.
Amateur radio operators (note: I am not one) are the first people to use their "lovably nerdy hobby" in practically every major emergency to coordinate resources and get help to where it's needed most. Amateur radio is far, far more than some little hobby. Making things difficult or impossible for this (small and growing smaller, sadly) portion of the population is not something to be taken lightly. They're not your neighbourhood vintage car restorer.
Re:Realistically (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Realistically (Score:5, Insightful)
HAM operators have proven their worth in emergency situations (like natural disasters), and the local HAM club here has a diesel generator ready to go in case we ever have something nasty like an earthquake or a tsunami. If the choice is between some technology that leaks RF like no tomorrow and keeping a "nerd hobby" that actually can do us good, then I'll pick the "nerd hobby" any day of the week.
But it ain't just HAM hobbiests. Your radio and emergency channels will be knocked out of the sky as well. Now maybe you can do without Easy Listening AM Gold, but while you've got your lovely broadband-over-power-line, you better hope your house doesn't catch fire or you or one of your loved ones has a heart attack, because guess what, you are, to put it bluntly, fucked.
Re:Realistically (Score:2)
If I hear one more Ham operator telling me how valuable he is I think I'll scream. Oh wait, I already did that.
All I know is that the horse is a bloddy pulp right now as far as this argument goes.
Re:Realistically (Score:2)
Re:Realistically (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Realistically (Score:2)
Re:Realistically (Score:3, Informative)
Oh! You mean those guys who pioneered.... (Score:3, Informative)
Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else... (Score:5, Insightful)
A mission to Mars [go-mars.de]
14 privately owned satellites in orbit [amsat.org]
Experiments and payload aboard the International Space Station [arrl.org] (and Space Shuttles when they fly again)
A worldwide GPS based tracking system [wikipedia.org]
An independent worldwide wireless data network [wikipedia.org]
No? Are you even still reading this? If so then ask yourself this, does your "hobby" provide emergency communications during disasters [wikipedia.org]? Does it? DOES IT? Was it THERE during the TSUNAMIS like amateur radio was [voanews.com]?
What about after the hurricanes? After Charlie tore trough Port Charlotte and knocked down all local sheriff and fire radio towers ham radio operators were there cranking up new towers, equipping the sheriff and first responders with new radios so they could save lives. They even used that tracking system [wikipedia.org] I mentioned on all of the vehicles involved in rescue operations so that way the first responders could coordinate their vehicles more efficiently...
But you've probably stopped reading. Like I could care. All I want to do is enlighten those who read your comment, give them a different point of view. Show them that Amateur Radio DOES matter, is an important part of our lives and will be around a long, long time. BPL or no.
Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. (Score:2)
But your wrong about that second paragraph. I never said or suggested anything of the sort nor have I personally been involved in any emergency amateur radio activities. I just know some people who do volunteer and have worked emergency communications before and I guess I'm a little too proud of them, a little too defensive of them.
As a side note I wasn't trying to belittle other hobbies-- I just think it's not a "hobby" is all, that was part of my point really, was
Re:Realistically (Score:2, Informative)
Maybe you can watch your neighbors porn on channel 2.
The people who listen to broadcast radio at these freqs might also be a tad hostile towards the interferance also.
Any navigation and ship to shore services left in this freq range?
Re:Realistically (Score:2, Informative)
Look at a frequency allocation chart. The ham bands make up a teeny tiny part of HF and low VHF. The rest is used for marine, aviation, broadcasting and loads of commercial purposes.
And BPL is not a 21st century technology. It's a misguided attempt to use 19th century technology (AC wires) for something they were never designed for, totally wiping out the HF spectrum in the process so it can't be used for anything else.
If you want broadban
Re:suits. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:BPL == Bastard Public License (Score:5, Informative)
practice (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not possible or p
Re:Quick Q (Score:3, Informative)
BPL (Score:3, Funny)
BPL (the B Programming Language) was a precursor to the C Programming Language.
It is still used in some legacy industrial applications, such as Jacquard Looms and waterwheel-powered flour mills.
Developed at Bell Labs, it has the distinction of being the language used to program the first TOIP (Telegraph Over IP) app, which, as everyone knows, is when Samuel F.B. Morse sent the message "WTF has God wrought? OMFG ROFL!".
Note th