[RFI] WSJ-BPL

[Jim Jarvis]

I think Mike's on-point with his view of BPL.  The reality is that
they're hoping that interference TO and FROM transient services will
be sufficiently brief that they won't have to deal with it.  They are
clearly not staffed to deal with it, nor agile enough, and they CLEARLY
have no concept of the cost of customer service.  

Jim/N2EA

> that it bothers public safety means a great deal more. One thing I don't
see
> mentioned is the possible lack of security of BPL systems. All that data
> radiating for miles!! Seems to me a seed could be planted in that area.
>
> 73 Tom

>From what I have read, the BPL people intend to encrypt
everything for this very reason. Aside from the added range
that might be possible from "hot" BPL equipment, 2.4 and
5.8 GHz WI-FI systems (including home wireless LANs) have
the same problem, but I think these systems are also easily
(and often) encrypted.

Sorry, but I don't think that's the answer. There are other
weaknesses, however, (some of which you have already
pointed out) such as business model viability, time-to-market
(e.g. too little bandwidth, too late in the broadband game),
interference potential to critical radio services (e.g. non-ham),
interference susceptibility (I think this could prove to be a
big one), etc.

73 de Mike, W4EF.........................................