Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless? - Networking

This is a discussion on Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless? - Networking ; All, I am considering going to a wireless internet provider that will attach an antenna on the side of the house and run a network cable into the basement. That part is easy, but getting the signal up to the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

  1. Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    All,

    I am considering going to a wireless internet provider that will
    attach an antenna on the side of the house and run a network cable
    into the basement. That part is easy, but getting the signal up to
    the home office on the second floor is the problem. I seem to have 3
    options since there is no easy way to run a network cable from the
    basement to the office -- wireless (801.xx), over the power line, and
    perhaps over the CATV co-axial cable.

    I called LinkSys & NetGear and tried to communicate with their support
    people (and you know what I mean). Ugh!

    I would appreciate any thoughts from people that have been down this road.

    Dave,
    --
    e-mail: d boland 9 (all 1 word) at fastmail period fm

  2. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Fri, 27 Jun 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    article , Dave wrote:

    >I am considering going to a wireless internet provider that will
    >attach an antenna on the side of the house and run a network cable
    >into the basement. That part is easy, but getting the signal up to
    >the home office on the second floor is the problem. I seem to have 3
    >options since there is no easy way to run a network cable from the
    >basement to the office


    Is there a computer up on the second floor now? How is it wired in?

    >wireless (801.xx),


    Possible - see the Usenet newsgroup 'alt.internet.wireless' which you
    can find on google (as Verizon is cutting expenses by phasing out news
    groups). Problem is antenna placement - you want to be able to aim
    antennas at each other, to improve signals, and to reduce interference.
    (Think of the difference between a flashlight and the same tiny light
    bulb without the reflector to "aim" the light.) Be sure to use WPA
    encryption and NOT the easily cracked WEP.

    >over the power line,


    Slightly more "reliable" but generally a bigger security risk. As it's
    less common, there is slightly less problems with interference.
    Depending on the age of the house and the type of wiring used ("BX"
    armored cable, or conduit, compared to Romex or knob-and-tube) there
    can be significant "range" problems.

    >and perhaps over the CATV co-axial cable.


    VERY messy. A lot easier to simply pull in new Cat5e cables, which
    makes the whole point moot.

    >I would appreciate any thoughts from people that have been down this
    >road.


    I didn't bother trying that road - installing Cat5 was a lot less
    complicated for me and substantially more reliable. Obviously, it's
    going to depend on the layout of the house and how it is constructed.
    If you have a 2.4 GHz cordless phone (which is going to cause problems
    of interference with 802.x), you could experiment with that to gauge
    the problems you're going to run into.

    Old guy

  3. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    Moe Trin wrote:
    > On Fri, 27 Jun 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    > article , Dave wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I am considering going to a wireless internet provider that will
    >>attach an antenna on the side of the house and run a network cable
    >>into the basement. That part is easy, but getting the signal up to
    >>the home office on the second floor is the problem. I seem to have 3
    >>options since there is no easy way to run a network cable from the
    >>basement to the office

    >
    >
    > Is there a computer up on the second floor now? How is it wired in?


    I have DSL going to a DSL modem then to a router then to two computers.

    >
    >
    >>wireless (801.xx),

    >
    >
    > Possible - see the Usenet newsgroup 'alt.internet.wireless' which you
    > can find on google (as Verizon is cutting expenses by phasing out news
    > groups). Problem is antenna placement - you want to be able to aim
    > antennas at each other, to improve signals, and to reduce interference.
    > (Think of the difference between a flashlight and the same tiny light
    > bulb without the reflector to "aim" the light.) Be sure to use WPA
    > encryption and NOT the easily cracked WEP.
    >
    >
    >>over the power line,

    >
    >
    > Slightly more "reliable" but generally a bigger security risk. As it's
    > less common, there is slightly less problems with interference.
    > Depending on the age of the house and the type of wiring used ("BX"
    > armored cable, or conduit, compared to Romex or knob-and-tube) there
    > can be significant "range" problems.
    >
    >
    >>and perhaps over the CATV co-axial cable.

    >
    >
    > VERY messy. A lot easier to simply pull in new Cat5e cables, which
    > makes the whole point moot.


    To pull a CAT 5 cable a skinny person has to climb through the attic
    entrance (very small). The person has to be short -- 3 ft. head room.
    And I don't think there is much room to pull a cable through the
    transom from the basement to the attic. This is why I'm looking for a
    better answer.

    My sense of things is that the cable from the basement can be routed
    to a wall connector, which connects to an 801.xx device on the first
    floor. Then in the second floor office I can use a receiver that
    either has a router, or one that goes to the existing router.

    >
    >
    >>I would appreciate any thoughts from people that have been down this
    >>road.

    >
    >
    > I didn't bother trying that road - installing Cat5 was a lot less
    > complicated for me and substantially more reliable. Obviously, it's
    > going to depend on the layout of the house and how it is constructed.
    > If you have a 2.4 GHz cordless phone (which is going to cause problems
    > of interference with 802.x), you could experiment with that to gauge
    > the problems you're going to run into.
    >
    > Old guy


    Dave,

  4. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Sat, 28 Jun 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    article , Dave Boland wrote:

    >Moe Trin wrote:


    >> Is there a computer up on the second floor now? How is it wired in?


    >I have DSL going to a DSL modem then to a router then to two computers.


    Have you looked at simply replacing your DSL carrier with another?

    http://www.business.com/directory/in...ernet_service_
    providers_isp/isps_by_country/united_states/

    That's all one line. In posts in some other groups, Verizon has been
    reported as "difficult" in some states regarding allowing other providers
    access to their wires as required by law. You might need to contact your
    state Public Utilities Commission (or what ever the state agency is who
    regulates telephone service).

    >> A lot easier to simply pull in new Cat5e cables, which makes the
    >> whole point moot.

    >
    >To pull a CAT 5 cable a skinny person has to climb through the attic
    >entrance (very small). The person has to be short -- 3 ft. head room.


    Could be worse - it's going to be in the mid-100s today, and that means
    it's going to be hot in the attic - never mind trying to crawl over a
    foot of loose fiberglass insulation. But I see your point.

    >And I don't think there is much room to pull a cable through the transom
    >from the basement to the attic.


    Another option would be to "follow" existing central heating system
    or plumbing runs. Still another might be to run the cables outside
    the house, as you did with the TV lead-in from the roof-top antenna
    common in the 1940s to 1980s (or as the phone company used to do on
    older houses).

    >This is why I'm looking for a better answer.


    From a reliability, security, and speed viewpoint, cable is better. A
    wireless solution may be easier to install, but tends to be strangely
    effected by wall/floor construction, foil backed insulation, and the
    presence of reflecting objects. You're complicating matters by being
    on different floor levels.

    >My sense of things is that the cable from the basement can be routed
    >to a wall connector, which connects to an 801.xx device on the first
    >floor. Then in the second floor office I can use a receiver that
    >either has a router, or one that goes to the existing router.


    "A" problem is antenna patterns. A simple antenna consisting of a
    "vertical" element radiates (and receives - the process is reciprocal)
    best broadside to the length of the element. For a vertical, this means
    on the same level. Think of a standard donut - that's the pattern of a
    simple antenna. "Up" and "down" are not the best directions. Higher
    gain antennas exist, much like a flood or spot light compared to a
    standard incandescent bulb. They provide gain by focusing the energy
    in a "desired" direction and reducing the energy is the "undesired"
    direction. Now if you need energy/coverage upstairs/downstairs, you
    could turn the antenna so that it's horizontal - but what you are
    doing is turning that donut, and while you now have up and down
    coverage, you lost the 'left/right' coverage. Antennas at both
    ends of the link have to be oriented the same (vertical verses
    horizontal) or you reduce the signal levels.

    If you want to try this, see if you can _borrow_ the equipment to make
    a test. If it works, fine - and if it doesn't you're not out much more
    than the time involved.

    Old guy

  5. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On 2008-06-27, Dave wrote:
    > I am considering going to a wireless internet provider that will
    > attach an antenna on the side of the house and run a network cable
    > into the basement. That part is easy, but getting the signal up to
    > the home office on the second floor is the problem. I seem to have 3
    > options since there is no easy way to run a network cable from the
    > basement to the office -- wireless (801.xx), over the power line, and
    > perhaps over the CATV co-axial cable.


    I'd just encourage you to keep an open mind about the wired route and
    see if there isn't some way to make it work. Often you can get Cat5
    almost anywhere, if you're willing to take various unconventional
    routes.

    I've had good luck in several places I've lived, running wiring inside
    the forced-air ductwork. It provides an easy way of getting from one
    floor to another, and is big enough so that feeding a fish tape and
    actually pulling the cable is easy. (Easier than actual condit,
    really.) Non-destructive too, which is a plus if you're not allowed
    to drill holes.

    Following water pipes is also good, although if you're near
    uninsulated (copper) hot water, you may need to get industrial
    high-heat cabling. Belden has a product that's good up to 160C I
    believe, which is hotter than most domestic hot water gets.

    Anyway, don't write off the idea of a wired network just because you
    can't do it the usual way. You'd be amazed at the places I've seen
    cables squeezed to get from one place to another. Just stay away from
    mains power...

    -Kadin.

  6. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    Dave wrote:
    > I am considering going to a wireless internet provider that will
    > attach an antenna on the side of the house and run a network cable
    > into the basement.


    Isn't the antenna fitted at the top of the house, and the cable runs
    down to where you want it?

    If the antenna is on the roof, it seems strange to run a cable down to
    the basement in order to connect to a computer on the second floor.

    I would speak to the provider, and tell them that you want the cable to
    go into the office on the second floor.

    Regards,

    Mark.

    --
    Mark Hobley,
    393 Quinton Road West,
    Quinton, BIRMINGHAM.
    B32 1QE.

  7. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:37:28 +0100, Mark Hobley passed an empty day by
    writing:

    > Dave wrote:
    >> I am considering going to a wireless internet provider that will attach
    >> an antenna on the side of the house and run a network cable into the
    >> basement.

    >
    > Isn't the antenna fitted at the top of the house, and the cable runs
    > down to where you want it?
    >
    > If the antenna is on the roof, it seems strange to run a cable down to
    > the basement in order to connect to a computer on the second floor.
    >
    > I would speak to the provider, and tell them that you want the cable to
    > go into the office on the second floor.
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Mark.


    That did cross my mind too.

    --
    begin oefixed_in_2005.exe

  8. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Fri, 04 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    article , Kadin2048 wrote:

    >I'd just encourage you to keep an open mind about the wired route and
    >see if there isn't some way to make it work. Often you can get Cat5
    >almost anywhere, if you're willing to take various unconventional
    >routes.


    Generally true - but one individual in another newsgroup mentioned the
    problems he had installing a network in a concrete bunker (in Israel),
    where drilling holes was next to impossible (meter/40 inch thick
    reinforced concrete walls), which also made using wireless nearly
    impossible, power lines were limited, etc. But other than that, it's
    often possible to get wiring in to most places.

    >I've had good luck in several places I've lived, running wiring inside
    >the forced-air ductwork. It provides an easy way of getting from one
    >>floor to another, and is big enough so that feeding a fish tape and

    >actually pulling the cable is easy. (Easier than actual condit,
    >really.) Non-destructive too, which is a plus if you're not allowed
    >to drill holes.


    Be sure to be using plenum rated cable - the jacket material on many
    cables produces toxic smoke/gases when burning. Yes, you are not
    planning to burn the house, but why make life more risky?

    >Following water pipes is also good, although if you're near
    >uninsulated (copper) hot water, you may need to get industrial
    >high-heat cabling.


    There are plenty of plenum rated cables with adequate temperature
    ratings.

    >Belden has a product that's good up to 160C I believe, which is
    >hotter than most domestic hot water gets.


    One would hope your hot water isn't that warm, as that's well above
    the point where you have high pressure steam in the lines - remember
    water boils at 100C at sea-level. Domestic hot water is usually 140F
    60C, and the warning labels on the hot water heaters (and the so-called
    instruction books that come with the heater) recommend setting the
    temperatures much lower - like a chilly 120F/49C. Most plenum rated
    cables are rated to at least 75C (167F) and should be adequate for
    most cases.

    Old guy

  9. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:39:16 -0500, Moe Trin wrote:

    > On Fri, 04 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking,
    > in article , Kadin2048
    > wrote:
    >
    >>I'd just encourage you to keep an open mind about the wired route and
    >>see if there isn't some way to make it work. Often you can get Cat5
    >>almost anywhere, if you're willing to take various unconventional
    >>routes.

    >
    > Generally true - but one individual in another newsgroup mentioned the
    > problems he had installing a network in a concrete bunker (in Israel),
    > where drilling holes was next to impossible (meter/40 inch thick
    > reinforced concrete walls), which also made using wireless nearly
    > impossible, power lines were limited, etc. But other than that, it's
    > often possible to get wiring in to most places.
    >
    >>I've had good luck in several places I've lived, running wiring inside
    >>the forced-air ductwork. It provides an easy way of getting from one
    >>>floor to another, and is big enough so that feeding a fish tape and

    >>actually pulling the cable is easy. (Easier than actual condit,
    >>really.) Non-destructive too, which is a plus if you're not allowed to
    >>drill holes.


    As a former comms engineer it never ceases to amaze me how people think
    you can get a service where they want it, without running any visible
    cable at all. In the UK telecom giant BT introduced a '3 metre' rule.
    Basically, you could have your termination up to 3 metres away for where
    the service attached to your home. All wiring mostly visible.

    But then, luxuries like forced air & service ducts are a dream here -
    despite property being some of the most expensive in the world (and most
    shoddily built, but that is another story)



    --
    Dog walks down the road. Gust of wind. Dog inside out.
    I've replaced my 'old joke' signature because a better man than me told
    me to ;-)

  10. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On 05 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
    <486f0ea6$0$26074$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, A J Hawke wrote:

    >Moe Trin wrote:


    >> Kadin2048 wrote:


    >> Generally true - but one individual in another newsgroup mentioned the
    >> problems he had installing a network in a concrete bunker (in Israel),
    >> where drilling holes was next to impossible (meter/40 inch thick
    >> reinforced concrete walls), which also made using wireless nearly
    >> impossible, power lines were limited, etc. But other than that, it's
    >> often possible to get wiring in to most places.
    >>
    >>>I've had good luck in several places I've lived, running wiring inside
    >>>the forced-air ductwork. It provides an easy way of getting from one
    >>>>floor to another, and is big enough so that feeding a fish tape and
    >>>actually pulling the cable is easy. (Easier than actual condit,
    >>>really.) Non-destructive too, which is a plus if you're not allowed to
    >>>drill holes.

    >
    >As a former comms engineer it never ceases to amaze me how people think
    >you can get a service where they want it, without running any visible
    >cable at all.


    Much depends on how the house is constructed. My previous house had a
    crawl space under the dwelling, and while cramped it was accessible
    allowing me to install network cables as needed. The current house is
    build directly on a concrete slab, and the only access would be the
    attic - which is heavily insulated (18 inches of blown-in fiberglass
    over the ceilings). A lot more work, but again, network cables added
    where needed.

    In the 1940s and 1950s, people learning the (house) electrical trade
    were taught a technique called "old work" which was used to install
    wiring in an older house. It used such tricks as removing the baseboard
    (wooden trim at the bottom of the wall) and hiding the wires behind
    that. Where needed, you could drill a hole large enough to pass the
    wire into the wall just below a convenience outlet. Another trick was
    to dig a channel in the plastered wall surface, stick the wires in there
    and patch/paint to hide the gouge work. There was also a product
    allowing wires to be run in metal channels (raceways) on the surface of
    the wall. Given todays wiring requirements (outlets every six feet, no
    more than a room on a given circuit, etc.) and the large amounts of
    electrical power needed in the home today, these techniques wouldn't be
    very practical - although the surface wiring materials are still found
    in DIY stores like Home Despot. The 'behind the backboard' technique
    does work for installing network cabling, as I used it to reach the
    exterior walls which are out of reach from above..

    >In the UK telecom giant BT introduced a '3 metre' rule. Basically, you
    >could have your termination up to 3 metres away for where the service
    >attached to your home.


    Wouldn't have worked very well in my last home - the phone and power
    attached to the house on the far side of an attached two car garage,
    about 5.5 meters / 18 feet from the nearest living space. And of course,
    the cable TV and network connection came in on the other side of the
    house.

    >All wiring mostly visible.


    There is a _recommendation_ in most building codes here that new homes
    be wired for communications devices - this used to mean telephone only,
    but even my 19 year old home was built with wiring for cable TV in 4
    of the rooms. Today, some builders are advertising their homes have
    pre-installed network cabling that meets the building code
    recommendation. What they DON'T tell you is that this is Cat1 wiring
    (wet string) and was probably installed by the apprentice electricians
    helper using a power stapler (meaning the wires are often shorted).

    >But then, luxuries like forced air & service ducts are a dream here -


    It's cool today - only going to reach 43 degrees... Celsius (109F), so
    air conditioning is mandatory. This house has 7 Tons (84000 BTU/H =
    24.6 KW) of central air. But I was told that British builders always
    put the plumbing outside so the repair crews could have access to it
    when it froze.

    >despite property being some of the most expensive in the world (and
    >most shoddily built, but that is another story)


    I dunno - I haven't seen a builder who isn't building using minimum cost
    materials and labor. Somehow, they get the result past the city building
    inspectors, and that's all they care about. It's hard to build a house
    for a mere $200/square foot (about 28 times the minimum hourly wage).
    Besides, the builders warranty is a whole 24 months!!! ($200/ft^2 is
    on the low side - houses were selling for $235/ft^2 before the bubble
    burst, and no, I'm not down town - I'm 28 _miles_ from down town.)

    When I bought this house, I noted that the water supply pipe coming out
    of the ground was 1 1/2 inch soft copper, and thought - "wow, quality".
    About a year afterwards, a neighbor mentions that the builder had used
    Polybutylene pipe there. The PB pipe has a history of splitting, but it
    was cheap. I also notice that the 240 Volt wiring used here for high
    power service such as the air conditioners, air handlers, water heater,
    clothes drier and kitchen stove (lighting and general use is 120V) was
    all aluminum wiring. Fifteen years after it was built, I notice low
    water pressure, and it's flooding the yard between the water meter at
    the edge of the property and the shutoff at the side of the house. Turns
    out the builder _had_ used PB pipe there, and transitioned to the copper
    about a foot below grade. The plumbers who replaced the pipe noted that
    the run unnecessarily ran under the concrete slab that is the driveway,
    and suggested this was done to hide the pipe from the city inspector.

    Old guy

  11. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:48:28 -0500, Moe Trin wrote:

    > On 05 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    > article <486f0ea6$0$26074$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, A J Hawke wrote:
    >
    >>Moe Trin wrote:

    >
    >>> Kadin2048 wrote:

    >
    >>> Generally true - but one individual in another newsgroup mentioned the
    >>> problems he had installing a network in a concrete bunker (in Israel),
    >>> where drilling holes was next to impossible (meter/40 inch thick
    >>> reinforced concrete walls), which also made using wireless nearly
    >>> impossible, power lines were limited, etc. But other than that, it's
    >>> often possible to get wiring in to most places.
    >>>
    >>>>I've had good luck in several places I've lived, running wiring inside
    >>>>the forced-air ductwork. It provides an easy way of getting from one
    >>>>>floor to another, and is big enough so that feeding a fish tape and
    >>>>actually pulling the cable is easy. (Easier than actual condit,
    >>>>really.) Non-destructive too, which is a plus if you're not allowed
    >>>>to drill holes.

    >>
    >>As a former comms engineer it never ceases to amaze me how people think
    >>you can get a service where they want it, without running any visible
    >>cable at all.

    >
    > Much depends on how the house is constructed. My previous house had a
    > crawl space under the dwelling, and while cramped it was accessible
    > allowing me to install network cables as needed. The current house is
    > build directly on a concrete slab, and the only access would be the
    > attic - which is heavily insulated (18 inches of blown-in fiberglass
    > over the ceilings). A lot more work, but again, network cables added
    > where needed.
    >
    > In the 1940s and 1950s, people learning the (house) electrical trade
    > were taught a technique called "old work" which was used to install
    > wiring in an older house. It used such tricks as removing the baseboard
    > (wooden trim at the bottom of the wall) and hiding the wires behind
    > that. Where needed, you could drill a hole large enough to pass the wire
    > into the wall just below a convenience outlet. Another trick was to dig
    > a channel in the plastered wall surface, stick the wires in there and
    > patch/paint to hide the gouge work. There was also a product allowing
    > wires to be run in metal channels (raceways) on the surface of the wall.
    > Given todays wiring requirements (outlets every six feet, no more than a
    > room on a given circuit, etc.) and the large amounts of electrical power
    > needed in the home today, these techniques wouldn't be very practical -
    > although the surface wiring materials are still found in DIY stores like
    > Home Despot. The 'behind the backboard' technique does work for
    > installing network cabling, as I used it to reach the exterior walls
    > which are out of reach from above..
    >
    >>In the UK telecom giant BT introduced a '3 metre' rule. Basically, you
    >>could have your termination up to 3 metres away for where the service
    >>attached to your home.

    >
    > Wouldn't have worked very well in my last home - the phone and power
    > attached to the house on the far side of an attached two car garage,
    > about 5.5 meters / 18 feet from the nearest living space. And of course,
    > the cable TV and network connection came in on the other side of the
    > house.
    >
    >>All wiring mostly visible.

    >
    > There is a _recommendation_ in most building codes here that new homes
    > be wired for communications devices - this used to mean telephone only,
    > but even my 19 year old home was built with wiring for cable TV in 4 of
    > the rooms. Today, some builders are advertising their homes have
    > pre-installed network cabling that meets the building code
    > recommendation. What they DON'T tell you is that this is Cat1 wiring
    > (wet string) and was probably installed by the apprentice electricians
    > helper using a power stapler (meaning the wires are often shorted).
    >
    >>But then, luxuries like forced air & service ducts are a dream here -

    >
    > It's cool today - only going to reach 43 degrees... Celsius (109F), so
    > air conditioning is mandatory. This house has 7 Tons (84000 BTU/H = 24.6
    > KW) of central air. But I was told that British builders always put the
    > plumbing outside so the repair crews could have access to it when it
    > froze.
    >
    >>despite property being some of the most expensive in the world (and most
    >>shoddily built, but that is another story)

    >
    > I dunno - I haven't seen a builder who isn't building using minimum cost
    > materials and labor. Somehow, they get the result past the city building
    > inspectors, and that's all they care about. It's hard to build a house
    > for a mere $200/square foot (about 28 times the minimum hourly wage).
    > Besides, the builders warranty is a whole 24 months!!! ($200/ft^2 is on
    > the low side - houses were selling for $235/ft^2 before the bubble
    > burst, and no, I'm not down town - I'm 28 _miles_ from down town.)
    >
    > When I bought this house, I noted that the water supply pipe coming out
    > of the ground was 1 1/2 inch soft copper, and thought - "wow, quality".
    > About a year afterwards, a neighbor mentions that the builder had used
    > Polybutylene pipe there. The PB pipe has a history of splitting, but it
    > was cheap. I also notice that the 240 Volt wiring used here for high
    > power service such as the air conditioners, air handlers, water heater,
    > clothes drier and kitchen stove (lighting and general use is 120V) was
    > all aluminum wiring. Fifteen years after it was built, I notice low
    > water pressure, and it's flooding the yard between the water meter at
    > the edge of the property and the shutoff at the side of the house. Turns
    > out the builder _had_ used PB pipe there, and transitioned to the copper
    > about a foot below grade. The plumbers who replaced the pipe noted that
    > the run unnecessarily ran under the concrete slab that is the driveway,
    > and suggested this was done to hide the pipe from the city inspector.
    >
    > Old guy


    Baseboards don't tend to exist here. Construction is usually brick from
    concrete foundation upwards. Some have the lower floor as brick and the
    first floor timber framed and finished off with cladded wood, upvc or
    tiles.

    Water services are in the blue pvc type pipe which is used to replace the
    lead or steel that was traditionally used.

    I've spent many hours chasing cables in walls and it was a relief when I
    went to work for BT that all wiring was run on the surface. We are now
    starting to see some new homes now with cat 5 wiring running back to a
    termination in the garage or utility room. Some are even fitted out using
    'mediaplex' cable but at about £5 ($9) a metre it is a rare exception to
    the rule.

    Air conditioning is mostly only in commercial buildings. A few homes have
    it, funny enough mine being one of them. This was a self fit as I worked
    in refrigeration as a junior years ago and I just got sick of getting hot
    at night.

    I was not aware you guys had 240v in premesis. I guess that must be some
    kind of a twin phase supply?

    Fantastic and interesting post to read - not much to do with Linux
    networking as I'm sure someone will point out - but thanks for what you
    have taken the time to write.



    --
    Dog walks down the road. Gust of wind. Dog inside out.
    I've replaced my 'old joke' signature because a better man than me told
    me to ;-)

  12. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    A J Hawke writes:

    >On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:48:28 -0500, Moe Trin wrote:



    >I was not aware you guys had 240v in premesis. I guess that must be some
    >kind of a twin phase supply?


    If by "You guys" you mean North America, yes, all power into houses is by
    two opposite phases-- three wire-- + - and ground. Most connections go
    between + or - and ground, but if you want 240 you use the connection
    between + and - (Yes, it is AC, the + and - indicate opposite phases.)
    Most stoves, dryers use 240. (high power devices so going to 220 gives
    twice the power on the same 15 amp current limit)


    >Fantastic and interesting post to read - not much to do with Linux
    >networking as I'm sure someone will point out - but thanks for what you
    >have taken the time to write.




    >--
    >Dog walks down the road. Gust of wind. Dog inside out.
    >I've replaced my 'old joke' signature because a better man than me told
    >me to ;-)


  13. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 13:50:59 +0000, Unruh passed an empty day by writing:

    > A J Hawke writes:
    >
    >>On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:48:28 -0500, Moe Trin wrote:

    >
    >
    >>I was not aware you guys had 240v in premesis. I guess that must be some
    >>kind of a twin phase supply?

    >
    > If by "You guys" you mean North America, yes, all power into houses is
    > by two opposite phases-- three wire-- + - and ground. Most connections
    > go between + or - and ground, but if you want 240 you use the connection
    > between + and - (Yes, it is AC, the + and - indicate opposite phases.)
    > Most stoves, dryers use 240. (high power devices so going to 220 gives
    > twice the power on the same 15 amp current limit)


    Yep, I was referring to North America. I always thought that your supply
    was 110v. Do all homes have 240v supplies?

    We have a different set up. Single phase 240 live with a neutral wire
    (basically an earth). This is plenty for homes. Industry has the option
    to opt for a 'three phase' supply. Between any 'phase' and neutral you
    get 240v. Between any two phases you get 415v. The downside is you have
    three separate electricity meters for billing.

    So, how do they bill you 'NA' guys for the supply? How is it metered?
    --
    begin oefixed_in_2005.exe

  14. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 17:28:48 +0000, Klunk rearranged some electrons to
    say:

    > On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 13:50:59 +0000, Unruh passed an empty day by
    > writing:
    >
    >> A J Hawke writes:
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:48:28 -0500, Moe Trin wrote:

    >>
    >>
    >>>I was not aware you guys had 240v in premesis. I guess that must be
    >>>some kind of a twin phase supply?

    >>
    >> If by "You guys" you mean North America, yes, all power into houses is
    >> by two opposite phases-- three wire-- + - and ground. Most connections
    >> go between + or - and ground, but if you want 240 you use the
    >> connection between + and - (Yes, it is AC, the + and - indicate
    >> opposite phases.) Most stoves, dryers use 240. (high power devices so
    >> going to 220 gives twice the power on the same 15 amp current limit)

    >
    > Yep, I was referring to North America. I always thought that your supply
    > was 110v. Do all homes have 240v supplies?
    >
    > We have a different set up. Single phase 240 live with a neutral wire
    > (basically an earth). This is plenty for homes. Industry has the option
    > to opt for a 'three phase' supply. Between any 'phase' and neutral you
    > get 240v. Between any two phases you get 415v. The downside is you have
    > three separate electricity meters for billing.
    >
    > So, how do they bill you 'NA' guys for the supply? How is it metered?


    3-wire (split phase) 240V electric meter.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_phase


  15. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On 06 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
    <48709c3a$0$2517$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk>, A J Hawke wrote:

    >Baseboards don't tend to exist here. Construction is usually brick from
    >concrete foundation upwards. Some have the lower floor as brick and the
    >first floor timber framed and finished off with cladded wood, upvc or
    >tiles.


    Maybe you use a different word to describe the trim located at the
    junction between the wall and floor. But if the interior walls are
    brick, the 'old work' solution was surface mounted items. This
    really hasn't been a problem for a long time here, as there was a
    major push to supply electricity to all existing houses in the 1930s
    and 1940s. My sister's previous house (about 65 miles NE of New York
    City) was built in the 1860s, and has been wired, and rewired twice.
    The present wiring was installed during a major "improvement" project
    they did in 1948 shortly after they bought the old place.

    >I've spent many hours chasing cables in walls and it was a relief when I
    >went to work for BT that all wiring was run on the surface.


    Most of the houses I've seen here built since ~1950 have had phone
    lines to several rooms installed by the builder. Extending the phone
    lines is generally done by the home-owner/resident, as the telephone
    companies charge quite a lot[1] for wiring beyond the demarc.

    >We are now starting to see some new homes now with cat 5 wiring
    >running back to a termination in the garage or utility room. Some
    >are even fitted out using 'mediaplex' cable but at about £5 ($9) a
    >metre it is a rare exception to the rule.


    Most new homes still lack this - you do get phone and CATV cabling
    into several rooms, but that's about it. One builder is offering to
    install plastic or thin-wall steel conduit - a bit pricey, but not that
    bad if done during construction. Several real estate agents (people
    who assist buyers/sellers of houses) are recommending the seller add
    network cabling before putting the house on the market.

    >Air conditioning is mostly only in commercial buildings. A few homes
    >have it, funny enough mine being one of them. This was a self fit as I
    >worked in refrigeration as a junior years ago and I just got sick of
    >getting hot at night.


    In England??? Well, I suppose - I recall seeing the rehearsals for the
    Trooping of the Colours in the early 1960s, and seeing the guards men
    keeling over in the heat - all of 22C/72F - though in fairness, wearing
    woolen uniforms and that big hat while standing to in the sun would be a
    problem.

    >I was not aware you guys had 240v in premesis. I guess that must be some
    >kind of a twin phase supply?


    It's exceptional _not_ to have dual voltages. In nearly all residential
    neighborhoods, it's merely a split (center tapped) transformer, with
    the center tap grounded, giving 120 volts line to ground, and 240
    volts line to line. Rarely, in some neighborhoods (mainly downtown and
    industrial areas) you may see two phases of a three phase star - again
    with the center of the star grounded - giving 120 line to ground, and
    208 line-to-line. The 208-240 volts is normally used for fixed, or semi-
    fixed appliances, and not for "portable" services.

    Old guy

    [1] I was going to put numbers there, but the phone company no longer
    advertises them. Internal wiring gets a whole column inch in the
    phonebook, with three choices suggested: phone company at fixed fee
    plus time and materials, independent contractor (likely with similar
    fee structure), and DIY. The last prices I recall were around $50
    plus $40 per hour or fraction there-of - meaning a minimum of $90.

  16. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On 06 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
    <487100d0$0$26079$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, Klunk wrote:

    >Yep, I was referring to North America. I always thought that your
    >supply was 110v. Do all homes have 240v supplies?


    Well, the ANSI standard says 120 Volts +/-5 percent, but people tend to
    speak of 110, 115, 117, 120, and 125 VAC and all refer to the same
    thing. As for all homes having 240 - I'd _guess_ that less than 5% do
    not have 240, and most of those have 208 (derived from 2 of 3 phases,
    rather than a single center tapped transformer running off a single
    phase). There may be a few 120 volt only houses, but other than mobile
    homes, they're pretty rare.

    >The downside is you have three separate electricity meters for billing.


    Those would be pretty old meters - most three-phase meters I've seen
    are single meters with integrating current sections. Larger users MAY
    also be billed on "observed" power factor (KW/VA), and the rates for
    poor power factor customers are significantly higher ("punitive" sounds
    about right). Three phase users with significantly unbalanced loads may
    also be eligible for different punitive rates.

    >So, how do they bill you 'NA' guys for the supply? How is it metered?


    Is it metered - yes, with incredibly rare exceptions which are
    flat-rate situations (such as traffic lights or street lighting). How
    is it metered? For the typical residence, two current coils and a
    voltage coil - but many meters are a computer operated monster that does
    everything except sing and dance while playing the accordion. The meter
    on my house records

    1. Total KW/H
    2. Total KW/H during "on-peak" hours (M-F, 09-21)
    3. Total KW/H during "off-peak" hours
    4. Peak KW drawn during any 60 minute period during "on-peak" hours

    and also displays

    5. Local time in HH:MM
    6. Date in MM DD YYYY

    because my power is billed as

    1. Fixed fee per day
    2. Fee per KW/H "on-peak" hours
    3. Fee per KW/H "off-peak" hours
    4. Fee per highest KW rate during any 60 minute period during
    "on-peak" hours
    5. Taxes based on total of 1-4 above.

    and that's actually a summary, because the bill has 21 separate billing
    terms, but all are based on one of these five rate functions. Also, the
    meter doesn't know it, but summer rates are different (much higher) than
    winter. And just to confuse things further, this is one of six rate
    plans available to the residential customer by this provider (there are
    two in this region) in this _county_ (never mind the other 13 counties
    in this state, much less the other 49 states or the two neighboring
    countries). The rates vary from a fee plus fixed rate for every KW/H,
    to several "progressive" plans where the rates per KW/H vary for the
    first N KW/H, next M KW/H, next X KW/H, remaining KW/H, and so on.
    Business rates are a whole 'nother ball of tar with even more
    complexity. Also, because my meter is computer based, it is trivial to
    add a third or fourth time-of-day rate scheme.

    Old guy

  17. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:16:29 -0500, Moe Trin passed an empty day by
    writing:

    > wearing woolen uniforms and that big hat while standing to in the sun
    > would be a problem.


    If it gets to 23c they are allowed to perform the ceremony in white tee's
    with union jacks on . . . ;-)


    >>I was not aware you guys had 240v in premesis. I guess that must be some
    >>kind of a twin phase supply?

    >
    > it's merely a split (center tapped) transformer, with the
    > center tap grounded, giving 120 volts line to ground, and 240 volts line
    > to line.


    Where would the transformer be sited? On one of the supply sticks feeding
    a street?


    --
    begin oefixed_in_2005.exe

  18. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:55:29 -0500, Moe Trin passed an empty day by
    writing:

    > On 07 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    > article <4871b4d6$0$2914$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Klunk wrote:
    >
    >>Moe Trin passed an empty day by writing:

    >
    >>> wearing woolen uniforms and that big hat while standing to in the sun
    >>> would be a problem.

    >>
    >>If it gets to 23c they are allowed to perform the ceremony in white
    >>tee's with union jacks on . . . ;-)

    >
    > Hopefully wearing a SP50 sunscreen lotion or better.
    >
    >>> it's merely a split (center tapped) transformer, with the center tap
    >>> grounded, giving 120 volts line to ground, and 240 volts line to line.

    >>
    >>Where would the transformer be sited? On one of the supply sticks
    >>feeding a street?

    >
    > Depends on the housing density, load, and the physical layout. For an
    > overhead line, it might be on the nearest pole if the house is isolated,
    > or in a crowded neighborhood it could be no further than about 75 meters
    > or 250 feet - closer if the load is heavy. This generally means a
    > pole-pig on every 1 to 4 poles. For an underground feed, the distances
    > are similar, but the transformer is located on an easement (someone owns
    > the property, but the power company has permanent permission to put
    > something there) on the side of the street, behind the sidewalk if one
    > exists. In this house, the easement is on my next-door neighbors land,
    > and there are five houses sharing the feed. But each house is "fused" at
    > 50 KVA (dual 200 Amp breakers on 125V). The previous place I lived in
    > had a mere 37.5 KVA (150 Amp breakers), and there was an overhead line
    > with the pole located between street and sidewalk. As I recall, six or
    > eight houses shared a transformer. My sister lives on the other side
    > of the country, where the lot sizes are substantially larger, and she
    > shares a transformer with two neighbors, even though the houses are
    > fused at 15 or 25 KVA (dual 60 or 100 Amp breakers).
    >
    > Old guy


    That's a heck of a lot of transformers to fit and I've got to wonder what
    the thinking behind doing it that way is.

    Here the three phase supply comes in to a small 'sub station' which takes
    the supply (typically 33kv,22kv or 11kv) and drops it to 240v with three
    large trannys. These will normally feed several hundred homes. We do get
    the stick type transformers as well, but they tend to be feeding lots
    more homes.

    The 'baseboard' thing, by the way, came to me in a flash of light. It's
    what we call 'skirting boards'. Typically telecoms and network cables are
    clipped or stapled to these on the surface.

    --
    begin oefixed_in_2005.exe

  19. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    Klunk writes:

    >On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:55:29 -0500, Moe Trin passed an empty day by
    >writing:


    >> On 07 Jul 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    >> article <4871b4d6$0$2914$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Klunk wrote:
    >>
    >>>Moe Trin passed an empty day by writing:

    >>
    >>>> wearing woolen uniforms and that big hat while standing to in the sun
    >>>> would be a problem.
    >>>
    >>>If it gets to 23c they are allowed to perform the ceremony in white
    >>>tee's with union jacks on . . . ;-)

    >>
    >> Hopefully wearing a SP50 sunscreen lotion or better.
    >>
    >>>> it's merely a split (center tapped) transformer, with the center tap
    >>>> grounded, giving 120 volts line to ground, and 240 volts line to line.
    >>>
    >>>Where would the transformer be sited? On one of the supply sticks
    >>>feeding a street?

    >>
    >> Depends on the housing density, load, and the physical layout. For an
    >> overhead line, it might be on the nearest pole if the house is isolated,
    >> or in a crowded neighborhood it could be no further than about 75 meters
    >> or 250 feet - closer if the load is heavy. This generally means a
    >> pole-pig on every 1 to 4 poles. For an underground feed, the distances
    >> are similar, but the transformer is located on an easement (someone owns
    >> the property, but the power company has permanent permission to put
    >> something there) on the side of the street, behind the sidewalk if one
    >> exists. In this house, the easement is on my next-door neighbors land,
    >> and there are five houses sharing the feed. But each house is "fused" at
    >> 50 KVA (dual 200 Amp breakers on 125V). The previous place I lived in
    >> had a mere 37.5 KVA (150 Amp breakers), and there was an overhead line
    >> with the pole located between street and sidewalk. As I recall, six or
    >> eight houses shared a transformer. My sister lives on the other side
    >> of the country, where the lot sizes are substantially larger, and she
    >> shares a transformer with two neighbors, even though the houses are
    >> fused at 15 or 25 KVA (dual 60 or 100 Amp breakers).
    >>
    >> Old guy


    >That's a heck of a lot of transformers to fit and I've got to wonder what
    >the thinking behind doing it that way is.


    110V has twice the amperage, and thus 4 times the resistance loss in the
    wires. Ie, at 220V the transformers can be 4 times as far away for the same
    loss in the feed lines ( assuming the same gauge).
    Also since the supply is two phase, this would mean there would have to be
    two wires strung -- that's a lot of copper.


    >Here the three phase supply comes in to a small 'sub station' which takes
    >the supply (typically 33kv,22kv or 11kv) and drops it to 240v with three
    >large trannys. These will normally feed several hundred homes. We do get
    >the stick type transformers as well, but they tend to be feeding lots
    >more homes.


    Here there is a "substation" (often another pole top transformer) which I think usually drops the supply to 600V
    which then feeds a whole bunch of houses up to 200m away-- the single phase 600V goes
    into pole top transformers to drop it to two phase 120V.


    >The 'baseboard' thing, by the way, came to me in a flash of light. It's
    >what we call 'skirting boards'. Typically telecoms and network cables are
    >clipped or stapled to these on the surface.


    Yes, it is the skirting boards. But usually the wires are hidden either
    behind the baseboards, or in cable channels or more usually in the
    basement, with holes drilled up to the jack location..


    >--
    >begin oefixed_in_2005.exe


  20. Re: Best way to replace DSL with point-point wirless?

    On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:36:32 +0000, Unruh rearranged some electrons to
    say:

    > Also since the
    > supply is two phase, this would mean there would have to be two wires
    > strung -- that's a lot of copper.
    >


    Many newer primary condutors in the US are ACSR (alumimum conductor-steel
    reinforced). Most secondary drops to residences are also aluminum
    conductors. Not as good as copper, but much lighter and cheaper.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast