Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Networking Businesses

Texas to Get Broadband Over Power Lines 294

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the getting-your-fix-any-way-you-can dept.
mrops writes "CNet is reporting that Texas will soon be getting broadband over power lines. From the article, "Broadband service over power lines (BPL) is not a new technology. People have been experimenting with building communication networks over power lines since the 1950s. But it hasn't caught on due to its low speed, low functionality and high development cost." Unfortunately this technology matured a bit too late and has been subdued by recent rush of wi-fi products. The technology has a lot of potential and wi-fi black zones are not an issue in simple home setups."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Texas to Get Broadband Over Power Lines More

Texas to Get Broadband Over Power Lines

Comments Filter:

  • Not really a new ISP... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MLopat ( 848735 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:30PM (#14294724) Homepage
    This isn't just a new ISP. More importantly, this technology will allow the Texas' power corporations to monitor their power grid and be alerted immediately in the case of failures. Additionally, this technology could be used to take meter readings and remotely disable power to non-paying customers. A nice side benefit is that the company can offer internet access. What this all translates into is a company that can offer power at a reduced price to its consumer, because of the associated cost savings and secondary revenue stream.

    • Re:Not really a new ISP... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:40PM (#14294815) Homepage
      What this all translates into is a company that can offer power at a reduced price to its consumer, because of the associated cost savings and secondary revenue stream.

      Sure, they could offer power at a reduced price. Or they could post a larger profit by reducing their costs while keeping income the same.

      I'm wondering which they'll pick.
    • Just keep in mind that "can" doesn't always (or even usually) translate to "will".

    • Re:Not really a new ISP... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Compholio ( 770966 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:42PM (#14294836)
      What this all translates into is a company that can offer power at a reduced price to its consumer, because of the associated cost savings and secondary revenue stream.

      Sorry man but this translates into higher prices for any type of wireless in the area because you wipe out everything with god-damn huge antennas. See relavant wikipedia article [wikipedia.org]:

      Some groups oppose the proliferation of this technology, mostly due to its potential to interfere with radio transmissions. As power lines are typically untwisted and unshielded, they are essentially large antennas, and will broadcast large amounts of radio energy (see the American Radio Relay League's article). Because of their lack of shielding, the BPL systems are also at risk of being interfered with by outside radio signals.
      • Carrier current radio stations have been transmitting their signals over power lines for decades without any problems. Why is it different for internet?

        • Re:Not really a new ISP... (Score:5, Informative)

          by Obfuscant ( 592200 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @07:07PM (#14295366)
          Because carrier current radio stations are being carried at a specific frequency with a relatively narrow bandwidth, and that frequency just happens to be unallocated for other uses and users in that area. E.g., a 560kHz carrier current radio station has a 10 kHz bandwidth and is available only in areas where there is no 560kHz AM broadcaster. Otherwise, there would be lots of interference.

          BPL is BROADBAND and appears throughout the HF spectrum, where there are LOTS of assigned users, some of whom are OTHER COUNTRIES MILITARIES, some of whom are our own, some of whom are international broadcasters, and some of whom are volunteers who provide emergency communications for just about any emergency that happens to take place, and almost all of which are covered by international treaty.

      • Mod parent DOWN as he only tells you HALF the truth. I, unlike most other /.ers went over to Wikipedia and READ the WHOLE article referenced. Here is what he DIDN'T tell you...
        New FCC rules require BPL systems to be capable of remotely notching out frequencies on which interference occurs, and of shutting down remotely if necessary to resolve the interference. BPL systems operating within FCC Part 15 emissions limits may still interfere with wireless radio communications and are required to resolve interfer
        • No, unfortunately the parent posting is right.

          ARRL and Motrola have demonstrated a BPL system that doesn't cause problems. It does not carry the internet signal on the medium-voltage wires (the ones before the transformer). It uses wireless for that and goes to BPL after the transformer and operates something like homeplug. This way, you don't need to shove a ton of power down the line to get a 0-80 MHz broadband signal through a 60 Hz transformer. But few (or no) BPL providers use the Motorola system.

          The

    • So, um, excuse my ignorance - but does this mean that the "infrastructure" is now on the net? Shutting down meters? Checking failures?

      It sure sounds like it.

      If true, I give it exactly 30 days before someone has figured out some "fun" things to do with their connection.

    • Re:Not really a new ISP... (Score:4, Informative)

      by adrianmonk ( 890071 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @06:44PM (#14295236)
      This isn't just a new ISP. More importantly, this technology will allow the Texas' power corporations to monitor their power grid and be alerted immediately in the case of failures. Additionally, this technology could be used to take meter readings and remotely disable power to non-paying customers.

      Well, it's not the same thing as broadband, but I live in Texas (Austin, specifically), and the electric company has already been doing these things for several years. About three years ago, they came and replaced my meter with a digital one that can be read remotely. I don't know if it can shut off power remotely, but it certainly seems possible.

      Also, they are a utility that sees its peak usage in the hot part of the day in the summer, and since peak usage largely determines how much generating capacity you have to build, they've instituted a program where they give customers a free smart thermostat. The thermostat communicates with the home office, and when demand is very high, the electric company can tell the thermostat to cycle off 1/3 of the time during the hottest part of the day. Supposedly, this only happens like 5 days a year, and only for a few hours, but it reduces their need to build power plants, so it's worth it for them to give out a free thermostat. Also, the thermostat is programmable, so you can set it to raise the temperature while you're at work and so on, which makes it a good deal for customers.

      Furthermore, the LCRA (Lower Colorado River Authority) has a big fiberoptic loop that they use for communications. I believe they provide bandwidth [lcra.org] to others, but the primary purpose of their network, as I understand it, is to allow them to control and maintain their equipment.

      Oh, and while I'm on the subject, I happen to live almost right under high-tension power lines coming from Mansfield Dam [google.com], and they wreak havoc with everything wireless in my apartment. My wireless mouse is jumpy, people can't hear me on the cordless telephone, etc. I switched from a 900 MHz cordless phone to a 5.8 GHz cordless phone to try and escape the interference, but no improvement. I tried using a remote controlled toy that works in a friend's house, but even it won't work in my apartment. Come to think of it, I wonder if they aren't already running some kind of high-speed data transmissions over these power lines.

    • Most power companies are regulated, and it is very unlikely that they will go to a regulator and ask to lower prices because their expenses have gone down. Especially if they've only gone down by the amount necessary to pay the poor slob who reads your meter at most once a month. But the power companies have had low-rate narrow-band PLC (power-line carrier) for something like 50 years and could have used it for this. They use it to run their facilities and collect telemetry. So, there is IMO sero potential

  • Lobbying? (Score:2, Redundant)

    by Winckle ( 870180 )
    Do you guys think that the standard Broadband companies, (DSL and cable providers for example) will lobby the US government for any regualtions/restrictions against this new way of providing broadband?
    This is a serious question, I am unfamiliar with how the broadband system works in america.

  • Brownouts... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TCFOO ( 876339 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:32PM (#14294743)
    Dose this mean that there will be brownouts whenever there is a high volume of trafic on the system?

  • I'd be more intrested in seeing... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by OneByteOff ( 817710 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:32PM (#14294745)
    Power over Wireless, call it 802.11P or something similar. Imagine a time where we no longer need power cords, plugs or even power poles. I know this is probably a dream that won't come to pass anytime soon, yet still it facinates me as a possibility. Too bad the inventors keep vaporizing themselves...

  • Paging Glen Campbell (Score:4, Funny)

    by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:32PM (#14294752) Homepage Journal

    I am a lineman for the county.
    And I've heard about SCO
    I'm lookin' at a Sun, I see another overload.

    I hear you trolling in the wire.
    I can see RMS whine.
    And a slashdotting in Houston,
    Will saturate the line.

  • Good. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by joemawlma ( 897746 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:34PM (#14294762)
    While Wifi and WiMAX are what most expect to be the future, how long will it be before small rural towns are 100% accounted for? If the goal is to give EVERYONE the option of having internet access in their town, BPL is probably the most intelligent option.

    With the power infrastructer already in place, it should be much less costly to implement this type of service to people outside of the large cities. I applaud Texas for this decision and hope to see more states follow in their footsteps. The "WI-'s" will take care of the big cities first, but what about everyone else?

    If the problem is getting everyone connected, then this is the solution.

    • While Wifi and WiMAX are what most expect to be the future, how long will it be before small rural towns are 100% accounted for? If the goal is to give EVERYONE the option of having internet access in their town, BPL is probably the most intelligent option.

      Not really. First, BPL doesn't exist anywhere, so there's still a lot of early adopter money to be wasted. Wireless solutions have been running in the real world for years now. Second, BPL still requires people to go around in trucks and put equipment up

  • You will NEVER see this in Texas (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:34PM (#14294763)
    The broadband-over-oil-pipeline lobby will kill this dead.
    • You jest, but there actually is a lot of fiber run in/along oil pipelines. Yes, for monitoring stuff, but they also run carrier fiber through the same conduit. The hardest part about a long fiber run is securing the rights to bury the damn thing, and oil pipelines solve that one nicely.

  • What about jamming Ham and other radios? (Score:5, Informative)

    by cryfreedomlove ( 929828 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:35PM (#14294775)
    I thought the problem with IP on power lines is that power lines are really just large unshielded antennas. The IP traffic on them runs a frequencies that will jam Ham and other important radio traffic like air traffic control radio. Has Texas solved this problem or is it Damn The Ham!

  • What about ameteur radio? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Bananatree3 ( 872975 ) * on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:36PM (#14294785)
    The usage of BPL is inherently going to cause signal noise around the 30 MHz range, where quite a bit of ameteur radio is found. The BPL technology is routing signals over an UNSHIELDED wire, which unlike telephone cable, radiates the signal outwards. This means that the signal will be leaked into the airwaves and, if there is enough concentration of the signals, will disrupt or all togeather drown out any ameteur radio broadcasts.

    • Re:What about ameteur radio? (Score:5, Funny)

      by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:42PM (#14294828) Journal
      That's alright, recent disasters have shown us that the government is more than capable of handling emergency services, and that we don't need amateur radio enthusiasts any more. It's time to sacrifice that so that power companies can get into the ISP game!

      Hope your house doesn't catch fire, however, because no one will be able to talk to the guys in the fire truck.

  • What about HAM Operators? (Score:5, Informative)

    by narcc ( 412956 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:39PM (#14294812) Journal
    BPL is bad for HAM. Shame on Texas!

    (Tons of reference Links)
    http://www.w4ovh.net/bplinfo.htm [w4ovh.net]

    (Other Links)
    http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/ [arrl.org]

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BPLandHamRadio/ [yahoo.com]

  • If Only the FCC Would Do It's Job Correctly... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bgelb ( 623168 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:41PM (#14294825)

    I was happy to see this article paid some attention to the technical hurdles - namely interference - that BPL poses. Though I'm a little upset to see in the article that, "experts say these issues have been worked out and that interference is no longer a problem." This is simply not true. I'd love to know who their experts are.

    As a radio hobbyist and student in electrical engineering, I feel this potential is really more of a certainty - its fundamental to the technology. It's not just a little kink to be worked out. That said, I certainly see nothing wrong with broadband over power lines (BPL) being given a chance to succeed or fail on its own merits, under sensible and objective oversight by the Federal Communications Commission. Unfortunately, the Commission is falling down on the job. The FCC has allowed BPL to operate under Part 15 of the FCC rules. These are the rules you often see printed on the back of remote controls, calculators or digital alarm clocks. They say simply that the device can't be used if it causes interference, and that it is afforded no protection from interference from other devices.

    The big difference between an alarm clock and BPL should be pretty obvious. Small electronics are very low power, localized, and operate intermittently. Most of them shouldn't be emitting radio waves at all. BPL, on the other hand, works by injecting a strong radio signal into power lines (read: antennas). It operates over a wide area, with high power, 24 hours a day. Part 15 was never designed to deal with a system like this. Cable TV, for example, is governed by a very strict and specific set of regulations to ensure non-interference.

    For Part 15 to work, there really needs to be a pretty reasonable expectation that devices don't pose any real risk before they're released into the wild. Such an expectation might be established through field tests or studies. Several such studies have been conducted, but since the outcomes weren't too favorable, the Commission has largely ignored them, and has contented itself by simply amending Part 15 to require that BPL operators have the capability to apply "mitigation techniques" to reduce, but not eliminate, interference after the fact.

    But if those don't provide an adequate solution, then what? I don't think for a second that a BPL provider, with millions of dollars riding on its service, will just shut down its operations as the rules would seem to require. More likely, responses would range somewhere from outright denial of the problem, to definitional arguments over what constitutes "harmful interference." Such arguments could drag on for years. In fact, this is already happening in Manassas, VA and has been for some time.

    This sort of deploy first, clean up the mess later strategy is a ridiculous way to allow an industry to operate. The rationalization seems to be that BPL is just too "exciting" a technology to be hindered with the gravity of sound technical analysis, and that it must be deployed even if it means compromising the Commission's obligation to protect licensed spectrum users from interference. But an effective Commission can't let catchy marketing monopolize its judgment.

    • The rationalization seems to be that BPL is just too "exciting" a technology to be hindered with the gravity of sound technical analysis, and that it must be deployed even if it means compromising the Commission's obligation to protect licensed spectrum users from interference.

      The only ones calling it "exciting" are the ones trying to sell BPL. It's really nothing impressive. The only problem it solves is the "last mile" hurdle in rural areas. You can get cable or DSL in most other areas at comparable speed
  • How dependent on line quality is this deployment going to be? I've heard about broadband over powerline before, but my impression was that it was very dependent on the quality of the physical infrastructure (i.e. old cables = spotty transfer). Does anyone know how true this is?



    NeverEndingBillboard.com [neverendingbillboard.com]

  • Am I secure? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by NotoriousGOD ( 936922 )
    What about security issues? What if I ping of death a local power company because I am directly connected to them? Couldn't this open the door to 'hackers' being able to screw with power transfer? Cable and DSL are more refined technologies which have security built in, but just standard power could be scary.
    • Just because you're sending signals on the power mains doesn't mean you have to be any more 'connected' to the electric company's IT infrastructure that if you were dialing-up in Guam.

      There's a seperate business entity running the ISP operation, and they won't be jacked-in to the systems that control the 'big switches'.

      And FYI, Sasser was implicated in having something to do with the massive power outage in NYC a few years ago, there was so much viral traffic on the internal control lines (low speed, high-r

  • Power over... (Score:2, Funny)

    by fa2k ( 881632 )
    Can they do PoE on that;)

  • Almost fiber to the curb (Score:3, Interesting)

    by smnolde ( 209197 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:52PM (#14294915) Homepage
    Except it's most likely fiber to a local wifi hotspot and your house is served via 802.11 modes. Using fiber vs a modulated ac signal is preferable since it requires less power and reduces the interference potential to licensed services.

    OTOH, BPL is another way for a utility co to get more taxpayer money for this infrastructure. Monitoring their equipment is a red-herring, I think.

    Will you be serviced? Are you sure? Texans are paying for it. If it fails for economic reasons the Texas taxpayers still pay for it.

    The frequencies thay 802.11 stuff uses is secondary to the amateur allocation, IIRC. With enough power a licensed ham operator can get on, hold a QSO and the wifi users must vacate the frequency until the hams are done.

    Fiber (almost) to the curb is nice, and the wifi is a nice way to finish it out.

    - KD5ZEF

  • FYI Tesla was here first (Score:5, Informative)

    by Belseth ( 835595 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:57PM (#14294959)
    Tesla sold Hearst on backing his power transmition system by telling him it was a way for mass communications. The communications were secondary to Tesla who was more interested it providing free power. Hearst pulled backing and had the tower demolished when he found out what Tesla was really up to. It was much like radio. Tesla designed the equipment for remote control and considered communications a secondary issue.

  • US problem is different from Europe (Score:4, Informative)

    by bananahead ( 829691 ) * on Monday December 19, 2005 @06:05PM (#14295006) Journal
    While interference is an issue, it is not the issue that has prevented us from doing this. I do not see anything that shows they have solved the fundamental issue. In the US, the power lines in your neighborhood are typically carrying 220 volts, which is more efficient than carrying 110, which is what your house eats. Those great big ugly transformers you see on every other pole are used to step the voltage down to 110 so your Xbox doesn't light on fire (note: the Xbox 360 has other means for accomplishing this) Unfortunately, the big transformer has a nasty side-effect: It acts as a low-pass filter on the power. This is a good thing if you want clean power. It is a bad thing if you are trying to carry a high-frequency wave of data on top of the 60-cycle hummer. The data is stripped off by the transformer. Since we developed the 'every other house' transformer model for the most part in the US, this means you might be able to talk to one of your neighbors. In Europe, they use a different model, a transformer for every block, so they have a less severe problem, but a problem none the less. This is why you can use your internal AC wiring for phones and stuff, but not get very far outside, I am not aware of how they have eliminated this problem.
    • Because you are kidding yourself if you think it stops at 240 volts (internal US voltage is actually 120 nominal). The further back you trace it, the higher the voltage goes. There's just larger and larger transformers until it finally hits the mains lines. Those are voltages in the 5 digits. Europe works the same way. In fact, in either country you will find buildings with higher voltage feeds and their own transformers. We have two massive ones out back, not sure what voltage feeds in, but it's over 1000
      • I am assuming a local loop for the broadband that doesn't have to concern itself with the higher voltage stepdowns. I believe 220 is what comes out of the local substations. A broadband carrier could tap in at that point with backhaul and only have to deal with the 220-110 stepdown. The issue is physics, so until you see them up on the poles replacing the big ugly transformers with something sleek and digital-looking, I would not hold my breath for broadband over powerlines.
    • IANALM (LM = Lineman), but I think the distribution lines are more on the order of 6 kV. The transformer steps it down to 240, center-tapped (so you get 120 V on each leg) for local distribution to a few houses.

    • Usually, the solution is to put a bypass repeater at each transformer. That is precisely why BPL is an expensive proposition.

      One alternative is to have fiber or something else to the nearest neighborhood transformer, and then put the signal on the power lines, but that's also expensive.

      This article was linked in an earlier post: Motorola's Commercial Broadband Over Powerline Solution Debuts at 'Telecom 2005' [prnewswire.com]. Notice how they don't mention the transformer problem at all. I wonder what their solution is?
    • Our city has BPL and I can tell you what the solution looks like. It's a box/clip thing that looks like it is screwed/fastened onto the primary wire. From there it has a little cable that goes down "around" the transformer to another box. The city is literaly festooned with these fucking things. I mean, the power poles look bad enough and we have to add more shit to them.
    • Residential power distribution methods vary, but most single phase lines are about 7200VAC.. 240VAC is supplied to the house via a pair of 120VAC lines, 180degrees out of phase from each other. Breaker panels send one of the feeders to each half of the breakers in the house, which is why it's possible to lose power to only half of your house...

      Commercial distribution is three phase 120/240VAC, 120/208VAC or 480VAC, depending on the customer.

      Other than that...your BPL "broadcast domain" *might* be larger t
    • Those great big ugly transformers you see on every other pole are used to step the voltage down to 110 so your Xbox doesn't light on fire (note: the Xbox 360 has other means for accomplishing this)

      Um... have you forgotten the recall of every x-box power cord from its release until about this time last year?

      The original x-box could start fires way before the 360 could.

      I'm getting pretty sick of people claiming that only the newest console technology can do this kind of stuff. Pretty soon we'll hear PlaySta

  • In Soviet Russia,
    if you can't get broadband over power lines to customers,
    you get customers over power lines to broadband.

  • Verizon's FIOS is what I'm waiting for. Can't wait till they deploy it in Michigan.

  • Predates the 50's actually.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by the_rajah ( 749499 ) * on Monday December 19, 2005 @06:45PM (#14295241) Homepage
    During WWII, hams were not allowed to transmit "on the air", but limited power "carrier current" transmittion was allowed and appears to have been popular given the construction projects I recall from reading the 1944 ARRL handbook in our small town library. This operation was, as I recall, around 150 KHz and sometimes, depending on the location of transformers, could cover a few miles.

    I don't see why this miserable technology hasn't died a natural death. It's like the monster in the movies that just won't quite die. Power lines are designed to carry power and become antennas at higher frequencies. It's as simple as that.
    • not just ww-II, my school had such a "carrier current" station in the mid 80's in the AM broadcast band for broadcast journalism majors. Actual coverage radius wasn't even half a mile in any one direction though, but reception was pretty good on 120 acre campus. A 60Hz buzz was fairly prominent in the received signal.
  • I got my 800 watt amp ready just in case I'm communicating with someone who's deafened by their nearby BPL. I sure hope this "new BPL" is notched and stays out of the ham bands, but I'll crank it up till I'm heard if need be. I hate running lots of power and normally keep it to 100 watts, but I'll keep the amp ready to go.
    - kc5cqm -
  • Shocking news!

    (Sorry... couldn't help myself...)

  • Baffle them with BS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nonillion ( 266505 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @07:01PM (#14295341)
    Just to show how inept our government officials are, do a google on "Willian Luke Stewart"

    This guy spun a a big sack of BS of how his company (Mediafusion) could provide billion plus giga bits over ordinary power wires. Now our administration has modified part 15 (to the point of uselessness), ignored ITU agreements and is ignoring valid interference complaints from BPL deployments. BPL is the king of a cardboard, duct tape and bailing wire Internet delivery method that should of NEVER gotten off the ground. A person with ANY reasonable engineering skills would not even consider this abortion. When the commission was presented with evidence from the NTIA about the interference problems BPL would create they were met with, "So what, don't confuse us with all this technical mumbo jumbo, find a way to accommodate it, our minds are already made up".

    To say the least I have no confidence in our FCC commissioners let alone other government officials to do their jobs properly.
  • Right here in River City!
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • And In Other News... (Score:4, Funny)

    by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @07:59PM (#14295678) Journal
    Austin, TX - The Department of Highways has just announced that it will be using public highways to ferment fertilizer.

    "This opens up a whole new market to us." M. Fitzal Smellhell, Deputy Director of the Department of Highways said. "We figure that by the end of 2006, we'll be producing nearly one third of all the fertilizer used in Texas."

    Opponents claim that this will making driving hazardous, and could have a serious effect on neighboring communities.

    Smellhell rejected these complaints. "There's always somebody who wants to stand in the way of progress. But we've studied this very carefully. The Ministry of Disturbed Maniacal Plans in Khazakstan has been doing this for years, and there have been no complaints that we're aware of."

  • Been there, done that (Score:4, Informative)

    by Phunky Monkey ( 443307 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @08:36PM (#14295860) Journal
    I live in eastern PA (Lehigh Valley Area) and was on the local trial of BPL.

    Our power company, PPL, built up a network about a year ago that promised BPL at 1.5mbps symmetric for everyone. I actually got in on the first trials of the service... and it simply sucked. Firstly and foremostly, the speeds NEVER got ANYWHERE near 1.5mbps... in either direction... at any time of day. About half of the system was based on 802.11x wireless, which is what got the signal from the medium voltage lines (the ones that feed the transformers that get the power down to 110v) to the homes. This was done because otherwise, they would need a device to jump over every transformer, since the signal for BPL doesn't survive otherwise. So, as I was wardriving, I noticed a VERY big bunch of PPLBroadbandxxxxxx APs in the area, which I suspect caused part of the problem: too much signal, not enough bandwidth.

    Other things I noticed (but were logical design decisions made by the system builders, not inherent limitations in the technology) include:
    - Throttling of ICMP, which totally screwed with any traceroute or ping measurement when troubleshooting
    - Use of unroutable IP space for end customers
    - Authentication of end users not by the BPL modem's MAC (like cable modems work), but by the MAC of the first device behind it... a real headache for those of use switching out devices on a regular basis

    All in all, BPL is one of those things that sounds good on paper, but is absolutely abysmal in practice. If I were to put my money on a future last-mile broadband technology, it would have to be DSL (newer DSL variations allow much greater distances from CO to demarc) or long-range wireless (WiMAX, low orbit satellite, 4G cellular, etc).

    Just for the record, about a month ago, PPL gave up, took down all of their equipment and went home. I suspect it's being used down in Texas about now ;-).
  • So what you're saying is, that in addition to the telco monopoly and the cableco monopoly, I now get a choice of a powerco monopoly for my internet? When are people going to learn that these monopolies are harmful to competition?!?!

    </sarcasm>
  • I was involved with a project back in early 2002 that was trying to pitch "smart" power meters to the city of Garland, TX. These meters would take a reading every six seconds and report the measurements back to a central station for analysis. The network used to report the readings wasn't quite worked out, so the project never made it off the ground, but BPL was seen as the logical implementation eventually.

    The advertised purpose of the meters was to create a power use profile for each household so a home

Slashdot Top Deals

God made the integers; all else is the work of Man. -- Kronecker

Close