rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to Nightfall
Re: Fantastic!
said by Nightfall  :
said by rf_engineer :
said by Psychephylax :
said by shaner :
We've had that kind of DSL basic service for $29.95 here in Canada for a few years now. Through the phone line.
The problem is that you need to live close to the Central Office. People in rural locations do not have a CO next to them. Which is why it's not an option for them. BPL has a range of 500 miles which is significantly further than what DSL can provide.
The native range of BPL is not 500 miles, so you can't compare this figure to the range of DSL. BPL's range is around 200 meters without repeaters.
For BPL to cover 500 miles, you need the BPL equivalent of a DSLAM every 200 meters (a feedpoint), or repeaters in combination with a feedpoint.
From a technical standpoint, BPL is technically inferior to DSL and cable.
Do you have any links to the actual native range of BPL? Someone say 500 miles, you say 200 meters. I would like to read more about it. So far I haven't found any information on the actual range.
I think the 500 mile figure came from the article and it actually means they're going to light up 500 miles of line.
BPL uses radio energy on an unshielded medium, power lines. Unlike copper twisted pair (phone lines and DSL) or coaxial cable (Cable Modem), it severely attenuates and radiates radio signals on the line. So due to physics it can't carry the signal far without regeneration using repeaters.
I have yet to see a BPL equipment vendor publish their exact distances on the web, but some good information can be gleaned from the FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking comment filings »www.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/hyperlinks.html . An Ambient system in my area uses feedpoints every 100 yards or so. The exact distances are going to vary between vendors, but it's no where near 500 miles. If the same logic were applied to cable and DSL, all of Antarctica could have broadband next week  |
