"Chris Green" <cl@isbd.net> wrote in message
news:sr68bi-kall.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu...
>> Did that once. I compared:
>>
>> - two sockets on the same extension block
>> - one socket on extension, other on adjacent wall socket, both connected
>> to
>> same dual-socket A
>> - one on extension, one on nearby socket B on same ring main
>> - one on wall socket A and one on wall socket B
>>
>> This was for a four-way extension with about 6 feet of cable.
>>
> But in none of those cases does the powerline network offer any
> advantage does it, they'd all work virtually perfectly using WiFi.
>
>> I didn't notice a significant difference with a simple extension, but
>> there
>> was a noticeable reduction for all but the first case if the extension
>> had
>> mains-spike suppressors.
>>
>
> To be any use to me powerline would have to work between sockets that
> are ten metres or more apart, that's the sort of length of Cat5 cable
> I'm using to feed my APs.

Yes I was doing it as a *test* of how quickly the signal degraded as you
added components (ext cable) or distance. It wasn't intended to be used *at
those distances* as a practical network - normally powerline adaptors would
probably be in rooms where you wanted to connect computers by Ethernet, so
spaced a lot further. And maybe wifi would be used instead of powerline.

In practical usage, I had a reliable link doing about 100-120 Mbps between
two powerlines, one on the upstairs ring main by the router and the other in
the room roughly below it on the downstairs ring main. It was an alternative
to drilling holes in the external walls and running Cat 5 through them and
down the outside of the house, or taking up carpets and drilling through the
floor of the upstairs and ceiling of downstairs, as close as possible to a
wall to minimise the visibility of the cable. That was to feed a TV, PVR or
Sky box or something that didn't have wifi, only Ethernet. I suppose I could
have bought a wifi access point and connected that by Ethernet to the TV
equipment - not sure why I didn't do that, now I think about it ;-)

On 14/01/2022 12:58, Chris Green wrote:
>
> Jeff Gaines <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> I have some kit that will only work if wired but a solution might be a
>> sort of reverse "WiFi" that picks up a signal wirelessly and outputs it
>> though an RJ45 (is that right?) socket - is there such a thing?
>
> Yes, TP-Link make some reasonably priced outdoor APs which can be used
> in pairs to talk to each other to provide a 'bridge'. Models such as
> the TL-WA5210G and TL-WA7210N can do it. However these are rather old
> models, I'm sure there are newer. I expect there are indoor devices
> to to the same as well.

I've put a DD-WRT build on a couple of Cisco WRT320Ns, and they can work
in client-bridge mode. Currently one is spare and I'm only actually
using one of them, in my bedroom to connect it to the rest of the LAN,
the rest of which is cabled. Mostly it's worked pretty well, though
there is some dependency on what the source of the WiFi connection is.
When my router was a DrayTek, ISTR some gotchas, though I'd have to cast
around for previous posts to recall them now. My current router is a
BTHH5a with an OpenWRT build, and that is problem free, everything I've
tried works exactly as it should.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

"Roderick Stewart" <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:k3r2ug1q2gqgs9ulomvj0cradosmndhdgh@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 11:12:39 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>
>>(*) Is it 415 V between phases when there is 240 V phase-to-neutral?
>
> Multiply by the square root of three, so yes, more or less.

I knew there was a root-3 in there somewhere, and I've seen 415 V mentioned,
but I wasn't *certain* whether I was right, despite having done elec eng at
university longer ago than I car to remember.

I'd love to know what the people were smoking when they came up with the
design of each bench in a lab being on a different phase, given the
interoperability problems that it caused. It was a new design, not something
inherited from years ago: when the floor was gutted and rewired, a simple
all-on-one-phase design was replaced by a new separate phase design. I'm
sure it wouldn't have caused too much problem to have all the various
servers in there on a single phase - ie to feed each floor of the building
off a different phase but everything on the floor (or at least in the server
room) off the same phase. It's a matter of where devices need to be
connected - H&S would prevent trailing cables between floors (!!!!!!!!!!!)
or from server room across floors to people's desks (!!!!!!) but within a
server room you may well have ad-hoc temporary connections all over the
place as equipment is moved around so one person can operate several devices
from one place while testing something.

I presume the permanent LAN and RS-232 connections went via opto-isolators
to get round the phase problem. And yes, even in the late 90s there were
still some people who preferred to use RS-232 and a dumb terminal on their
desk, rather than a PC and a VT220 emulator over LAN, to access some of the
Unix servers.

On 14/01/2022 11:12, NY wrote:
> "Brian Gaff (Sofa)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:srri4i$ks1$1@dont-email.me...
>> Another oddity of powerline networks is that at least around here,
>> some manage to also work two houses down the street but not in the in
>> between houses. I would imagine this means that the signals are not
>> getting to the phases of the mains on the intervening  properties.
>> When there used to be analogue wireless intercoms plugged into the
>> mains, the same effect could be seen, so watch it with older baby
>> monitors.
>
> Yes I think successive houses are often wired on successive phases, so
> houses 1, 7, 13 will all be on one phase, and 3, 9, 15 will be on
> another, and 5, 11, 17 will be on the third. Assuming houses are
> numbered odds on one side, evens on the opposite side.
>
> I remember our server-room at work was (for some reason) wired with
> different phases on each leg of the capital E layout of benches. There
> were big signs on each bench saying which phase it used, and even
> bigger signs warning people not to connect equipment (eg by RS-232) on
> two benches - which was a real nuisance if you brought in a piece of
> equipment to be used temporarily and the only spare mains sockets were
> on the wrong bench.
>
It's not unusual in my experience to have different phases in an
equipment rack. For instance one phase on a PDU up one side, and another
from another phase on the other side.
And it causes no problems for kit with two PSUs to be connected with the
the two IECs connected to each phase.

However, as you say, it's not really on in an environment where you've
got the lids off the kit !

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> "Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:srrao7$89i$1@dont-email.me...
>
> [snip: my account of spectacularly poor data transfer dates with Powerline]
>
> > I could only comment that you must have been using the wrong type of
> > powerline unit. I have a couple of 600Mb TP-Link units. One is connected
> > to my source router adjacent to the VM superhub configured as a modem -
> > this on the downstairs ring; I have tried a 'receiver' on the upstairs
> > ring at the other end of the house and from an incoming source typically
> > about 110Mb I was getting well in excess of 50Mb upstairs. I then tried
> > connection to my shed: this is from a different power box in the
> > (built-in) garage so the meeting point of the rings is actually at the
> > meter termination, whence it runs by about 30m of 1.5mm armoured cable to
> > the shed and onto a spur feed there - I recorded 37Mb at that location.
> >
> > I too am a radio amateur and have found no RFI on my receivers whatsoever.
>
> I had been using a pair of WD Livewire (*) devices at our old house (2 ring
> mains, one CU - nice and simple) to get Ethernet from the router to a TV or
> PVR which only had Ethernet and no wifi. It gave perfectly good results,
> though I forget what speed.
>
> I tried those in our new house, and also a pair of Dlink DHP-500AV devices
> for comparison, and in both cases the results were dramatically worse. In
> both cases I was using like with like, rather than Dlink talking to WD.
>
> I can only think that there is something about the wiring in our house which
> spoils the Powerline signal. I can understand that going from one ring main
> to another *might* cause extra denaturing of the signal, and going from one
> CU to the other will probably cause more of it, but I don't see why two
> sockets about 20 feet apart on the same ring main should be *so* bad.
>
> It's the first time I've had such severe problems with Powerline.
>
>
> When I can find an AM radio and power it up, I'll plug the devices in and
> see whether I can detect any interference in the LW or MW band that is
> attributable to Powerline. I can't test the effect on amateur radio bands.
>

I found that switched mode PSUs (wall warts) electrical noise could
seriously degrade data speed on my homeplug setup. Now I ensure that
all my wall warts are plugged into a filtered power socket strip to
prevent that interference reaching the ring main. Since doing so I get
acceptable data speed (~35 Mb/s) from one end of the house to the other.

--
g8dgc <g8dgc.1@gmail.com>

> I found that switched mode PSUs (wall warts) electrical noise could
> seriously degrade data speed on my homeplug setup. Now I ensure that
> all my wall warts are plugged into a filtered power socket strip to
> prevent that interference reaching the ring main. Since doing so I get
> acceptable data speed (~35 Mb/s) from one end of the house to the other.

35 Mb/s is "acceptable"???

not once you have:

2 or more kids watching You Tube / netflix / Disney on their devices

or you're downloading an ISO such as a 4.6 GB Ubuntu 20.04 , that would
take hours....

Or you're copying to/from a NAS.... which would take hours

Or you're streaming and watching a 4K video like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXb3EKWsInQ

and right click on the video and click on stats for Nerds, for me that
peaks at 55 MB/s with no dropped frames on a R9 graphics card and 54%
CPU load.

On 14/01/2022 12:03, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> I have some kit that will only work if wired but a solution might be a
> sort of reverse "WiFi" that picks up a signal wirelessly and outputs it
> though an RJ45 (is that right?) socket - is there such a thing?

My openWRT router seems to offer the option of connecting in client
mode, so I imagine the hardware on most WiFi routers would support this,
with the right firmware and configuration.

On 14/01/2022 14:51, David Woolley wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 12:03, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>> I have some kit that will only work if wired but a solution might be a
>> sort of reverse "WiFi" that picks up a signal wirelessly and outputs
>> it though an RJ45 (is that right?) socket - is there such a thing?
>
> My openWRT router seems to offer the option of connecting in client
> mode, so I imagine the hardware on most WiFi routers would support this,
> with the right firmware and configuration.

In fact you could use a Raspberry pi and turn that into a AP
client/bridge using OpenWRT or similar

https://pimylifeup.com/raspberry-pi-wifi-bridge/

https://willhaley.com/blog/raspberry-pi-wifi-ethernet-bridge/

https://www.elementzonline.com/blog/sharing-or-bridging-internet-to-ethernet-from-wifi-raspberry-pI

In article <do18bi-7k9l.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu>, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net>
wrote:
> Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Back to power adaptors. Never used them myself, but in sorting out
> > others I've discovered they don't work well when plugged into 'flying
> > lead' extension blocks. Try to use them plugged into the actual wall
> > socket.
> >
> The instructions with them do always say that they should be plugged in
> direct to a wall socket. Putting my electronics/electrical engineering
> hat on I can't think of any good reason why this should be so though.

The extension cable probably has a different characteristic impedance than
that of the wiring in the house walls. The plug+socket also acts as a shunt
mismatch and a series mismatch network. Moving the distribution board's
lead into a different shape will probably also affect this. None of these
items are designed to be carriers for RF.

> It might be interesting to try this out. Simply get a pair of powerline
> devices and connect them via a pair of sockets on the ends of lengths of
> different types of wire. Do they only work well when all of the cable
> from one to the other is 2.5sqmm T&E?

IIRC the BBC did some measurements on these devices decades ago and found
all kinds of weird behaviours that varied with how they were connected and
the mains wiring arrangements. They concluded that they would be a PITA. In
fact I think I wrote about this for the old 'Living with Technology'
magazine. I'll see if I can find the article...

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <srrm9m$tib$2@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> I didn't notice a significant difference with a simple extension, but
> there was a noticeable reduction for all but the first case if the
> extension had mains-spike suppressors.

They may have flattened the RF near each half cycle peak of the mains 50Hz.
Result would be buckets of RFI 'intermod' and garbling the data coms.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> > I found that switched mode PSUs (wall warts) electrical noise could
> > seriously degrade data speed on my homeplug setup. Now I ensure that
> > all my wall warts are plugged into a filtered power socket strip to
> > prevent that interference reaching the ring main. Since doing so I get
> > acceptable data speed (~35 Mb/s) from one end of the house to the other.
> >
>
> 35 Mb/s is "acceptable"???
>
> not once you have:
>
> 2 or more kids watching You Tube / netflix / Disney on their devices
>
> or you're downloading an ISO such as a 4.6 GB Ubuntu 20.04 , that would
> take hours....
>
> Or you're copying to/from a NAS.... which would take hours
>
> Or you're streaming and watching a 4K video like:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXb3EKWsInQ
>
> and right click on the video and click on stats for Nerds, for me that
> peaks at 55 MB/s with no dropped frames on a R9 graphics card and 54%
> CPU load.
>

35Mb/s is very acceptable when ones FTTC connection maxes out at 50Mb/s.
I'm sure I could improve on 35 Mb/s with modern Homeplugs if I needed
to, mine are ~6 years old.

My main AP is right next to the modem and NAS so it benefits from full
speed. My secondary AP is fed by the Homeplug and serves only the
lounge. The demand on that AP is at most two machines streaming HD
video and backing up to NAS simultaneously; I find 35Mb/s is more than
enough for that. I don't usually download a 4.6 GB Ubuntu 20.04 more
frequently than once a week.

--
g8dgc <g8dgc.1@gmail.com>

On 14/01/2022 15:16, g8dgc wrote:
> SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> I wrote:
>>
>>> I found that switched mode PSUs (wall warts) electrical noise could
>>> seriously degrade data speed on my homeplug setup. Now I ensure that
>>> all my wall warts are plugged into a filtered power socket strip to
>>> prevent that interference reaching the ring main. Since doing so I get
>>> acceptable data speed (~35 Mb/s) from one end of the house to the other.
>>>
>>
>> 35 Mb/s is "acceptable"???
>>
>> not once you have:
>>
>> 2 or more kids watching You Tube / netflix / Disney on their devices
>>
>> or you're downloading an ISO such as a 4.6 GB Ubuntu 20.04 , that would
>> take hours....
>>
>> Or you're copying to/from a NAS.... which would take hours
>>
>> Or you're streaming and watching a 4K video like:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXb3EKWsInQ
>>
>> and right click on the video and click on stats for Nerds, for me that
>> peaks at 55 MB/s with no dropped frames on a R9 graphics card and 54%
>> CPU load.
>>
>
> 35Mb/s is very acceptable when ones FTTC connection maxes out at 50Mb/s.
> I'm sure I could improve on 35 Mb/s with modern Homeplugs if I needed
> to, mine are ~6 years old.
>
> My main AP is right next to the modem and NAS so it benefits from full
> speed. My secondary AP is fed by the Homeplug and serves only the
> lounge. The demand on that AP is at most two machines streaming HD
> video and backing up to NAS simultaneously; I find 35Mb/s is more than
> enough for that. I don't usually download a 4.6 GB Ubuntu 20.04 more
> frequently than once a week.

A 4.6 GB DVD downloads here in 65 seconds over my 500 Mb/s FTTH service.

The FTTH product is also symetric, in that I also get 500 mbit/s upload
which is great for cloud storage.

I could not see myself going back to a 50 Mb/s service :-)

SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:

[...]

> Or you're streaming and watching a 4K video like:
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXb3EKWsInQ>
>
> and right click on the video and click on stats for Nerds, for me that
> peaks at 55 MB/s with no dropped frames on a R9 graphics card and 54%
> CPU load.

[...]

I forgot to say thanks for the link, that video looks very nice here in
HDR 4K. I must admit it did buffer once or twice at that resolution,
it's smoother at 1440p60 HDR and looks nearly as good. I'm looking
forward to FTTP, though, you can never have too much bandwidth.

--
g8dgc <g8dgc.1@gmail.com>

On 14/01/2022 13:20, NY wrote:
> "Tony Gamble" <tonygamble@compuserve.com> wrote in message
> news:j4d698Fq9v1U1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 13/01/2022 18:54, Tweed wrote:
>>
>>> Given the OP says wiring will be a pain I assume Ethernet cable is
>>> not an
>>> option. I’d second the recommendation for a mesh network. You need a 3
>>> radio per unit version. 2.5 and 5GHz plus an additional hidden 5GHz that
>>> links the units together. I have a Linksys Velop system and it works
>>> well.
>>> If the house has a wooden upstairs floor place the units upstairs and
>>> let
>>> them shine down into the ground floor. Wood is pretty transparent to RF.
>>>
>>
>> How many Linksys Velop units would you expect to need to cover a 2,000 sq
>> ft Victorian apartement?
>
> When you say "apartment", does that imply that it's all on one level?
>
Yes. All one level but particularly thick brick internal walls.

My router is in a corridor.

The rooms where I need the internet are each a good 20 metres away from it.

In one I need a proper wired feed for two devices - Humax and Shield -
plus wifi for computers/phones/tablets.

So I am talking about a prime unit to take a feed from my router and
then two wifi feeds and two hard wire feeds. I guess that commits me to
five bits of kit.

But the question is whether my 20 metres and solid brick Victorian walls
will stifle the signal? I am not sure how I try without making the
commitment.

Tony

Tony Gamble <tonygamble@compuserve.com> wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 13:20, NY wrote:
>> "Tony Gamble" <tonygamble@compuserve.com> wrote in message
>> news:j4d698Fq9v1U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 13/01/2022 18:54, Tweed wrote:
>>>
>>>> Given the OP says wiring will be a pain I assume Ethernet cable is
>>>> not an
>>>> option. I’d second the recommendation for a mesh network. You need a 3
>>>> radio per unit version. 2.5 and 5GHz plus an additional hidden 5GHz that
>>>> links the units together. I have a Linksys Velop system and it works
>>>> well.
>>>> If the house has a wooden upstairs floor place the units upstairs and
>>>> let
>>>> them shine down into the ground floor. Wood is pretty transparent to RF.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How many Linksys Velop units would you expect to need to cover a 2,000 sq
>>> ft Victorian apartement?
>>
>> When you say "apartment", does that imply that it's all on one level?
>>
> Yes. All one level but particularly thick brick internal walls.
>
> My router is in a corridor.
>
> The rooms where I need the internet are each a good 20 metres away from it.
>
> In one I need a proper wired feed for two devices - Humax and Shield -
> plus wifi for computers/phones/tablets.
>
> So I am talking about a prime unit to take a feed from my router and
> then two wifi feeds and two hard wire feeds. I guess that commits me to
> five bits of kit.
>
> But the question is whether my 20 metres and solid brick Victorian walls
> will stifle the signal? I am not sure how I try without making the
> commitment.
>
> Tony
>
>

If you have the existing router up and running and it does 5GHz you can
wander round with a portable device and get a feeling for how well 5GHz
propagates around your property. The trick is to put the satellite units
between the main unit and the equipment, not right up near the equipment.
So just putting it the other side of your thick wall might be best, so it
gets a good signal from the master unit and then radiates it freely within
the room.

"g8dgc" <g8dgc.2@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1pls39l.u41hgr1rcoq8hN%g8dgc.2@gmail.com...
> SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Or you're streaming and watching a 4K video like:
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXb3EKWsInQ>
>>
>> and right click on the video and click on stats for Nerds, for me that
>> peaks at 55 MB/s with no dropped frames on a R9 graphics card and 54%
>> CPU load.
>
> [...]
>
> I forgot to say thanks for the link, that video looks very nice here in
> HDR 4K. I must admit it did buffer once or twice at that resolution,
> it's smoother at 1440p60 HDR and looks nearly as good. I'm looking
> forward to FTTP, though, you can never have too much bandwidth.

It shows my connection speed as around 20 Mbps and data transfers about
every 5 seconds, so not very intensive data transfer. I don't see any stats
about dropped frames, but subjectively I'd say it was dropping a frame or so
every second which may be a PC issue rather than a data-transfer one. PC is
Athlon II X4 630 with 8 GB RAM (RAM usage stayed at about 50% of total) and
Asus EAH5450 graphics at 1920x1080x50 Hz.

Interesting that the video says it's UHD but it's only 1920x1080 which I
think of as being normal HD.

On 14/01/2022 16:16, NY wrote:
> "g8dgc" <g8dgc.2@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1pls39l.u41hgr1rcoq8hN%g8dgc.2@gmail.com...
>> SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Or you're streaming and watching a 4K video like:
>>>
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXb3EKWsInQ>
>>>
>>> and right click on the video and click on stats for Nerds, for me that
>>> peaks at 55 MB/s with no dropped frames on a R9 graphics card and 54%
>>> CPU load.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> I forgot to say thanks for the link, that video looks very nice here in
>> HDR 4K.  I must admit it did buffer once or twice at that resolution,
>> it's smoother at 1440p60 HDR and looks nearly as good.  I'm looking
>> forward to FTTP, though, you can never have too much bandwidth.
>
> It shows my connection speed as around 20 Mbps and data transfers about
> every 5 seconds, so not very intensive data transfer. I don't see any
> stats about dropped frames, but subjectively I'd say it was dropping a
> frame or so every second which may be a PC issue rather than a
> data-transfer one. PC is Athlon II X4 630 with 8 GB RAM (RAM usage
> stayed at about 50% of total) and Asus EAH5450 graphics at 1920x1080x50 Hz.
>
> Interesting that the video says it's UHD but it's only 1920x1080 which I
> think of as being normal HD.

thats because even though the is un UHD, your PC cannot (yet) support 4K
so it got downscaled to a resolution that your mobo, CPU and graphics
can support.

You also need a 4k monitor too on display port or USB-C (HDMI support is
also possible in some circumstances but without HDR.)

On 14/01/2022 16:28, SH wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 16:16, NY wrote:
>> "g8dgc" <g8dgc.2@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1pls39l.u41hgr1rcoq8hN%g8dgc.2@gmail.com...
>>> SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Or you're streaming and watching a 4K video like:
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXb3EKWsInQ>
>>>>
>>>> and right click on the video and click on stats for Nerds, for me that
>>>> peaks at 55 MB/s with no dropped frames on a R9 graphics card and 54%
>>>> CPU load.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I forgot to say thanks for the link, that video looks very nice here in
>>> HDR 4K.  I must admit it did buffer once or twice at that resolution,
>>> it's smoother at 1440p60 HDR and looks nearly as good.  I'm looking
>>> forward to FTTP, though, you can never have too much bandwidth.
>>
>> It shows my connection speed as around 20 Mbps and data transfers
>> about every 5 seconds, so not very intensive data transfer. I don't
>> see any stats about dropped frames, but subjectively I'd say it was
>> dropping a frame or so every second which may be a PC issue rather
>> than a data-transfer one. PC is Athlon II X4 630 with 8 GB RAM (RAM
>> usage stayed at about 50% of total) and Asus EAH5450 graphics at
>> 1920x1080x50 Hz.
>>
>> Interesting that the video says it's UHD but it's only 1920x1080 which
>> I think of as being normal HD.
>
> thats because even though the is un UHD, your PC cannot (yet) support 4K
> so it got downscaled to a resolution that your mobo, CPU and graphics
> can support.
>
> You also need a 4k monitor too on display port or USB-C (HDMI support is
> also possible in some circumstances but without HDR.)

plus you have to increase the resolution in You tube too up to 4K

On 14/01/2022 16:28, SH wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 16:16, NY wrote:
>> It shows my connection speed as around 20 Mbps and data transfers
>> about every 5 seconds, so not very intensive data transfer. I don't
>> see any stats about dropped frames, but subjectively I'd say it was
>> dropping a frame or so every second which may be a PC issue rather
>> than a data-transfer one. PC is Athlon II X4 630 with 8 GB RAM (RAM
>> usage stayed at about 50% of total) and Asus EAH5450 graphics at
>> 1920x1080x50 Hz.
>>
>> Interesting that the video says it's UHD but it's only 1920x1080 which
>> I think of as being normal HD.
>
> thats because even though the is un UHD, your PC cannot (yet) support 4K
> so it got downscaled to a resolution that your mobo, CPU and graphics
> can support.
>
> You also need a 4k monitor too on display port or USB-C (HDMI support is
> also possible in some circumstances but without HDR.)

I'd just realised that. When I looked at what resolutions were able I
saw that 1440p and 2160p were also available. And when my poor PC tried
to play 2160, it managed 1 frame every second with a *lot* of dropped
frames.

So I tried it on my laptop: still 1920x1080 native resolution but a much
faster CPU and graphics (Intel Core i7-10750H at 2.6 GHz, 16 GB RAM,
Intel UHD/NVidia GeForce RTX 2060 graphics). That really stresses the
download: the buffer health of Stats For Nerds barely gets off zero and
occasionally does dip to zero, showing that it's struggling to receive
data as fast as the card displays it. That's for Youtube set to 2160p
(still scaled to 1920x1080).

The result looked stunning but it was starting to stutter a bit more.

I've had my laptop displaying UHD video in VLC with no dropped frames.
That's for 2160p, from satellite 12441V ("SES UHD Demo" channel),
received on a Raspberry Pi via a PCTV 461e tuner and then accessed
across my wifi LAN to the Windows 10 laptop.

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 12:58, Chris Green wrote:
>>
>> Jeff Gaines <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have some kit that will only work if wired but a solution might be a
>>> sort of reverse "WiFi" that picks up a signal wirelessly and outputs it
>>> though an RJ45 (is that right?) socket - is there such a thing?
>>
>> Yes, TP-Link make some reasonably priced outdoor APs which can be used
>> in pairs to talk to each other to provide a 'bridge'. Models such as
>> the TL-WA5210G and TL-WA7210N can do it. However these are rather old
>> models, I'm sure there are newer. I expect there are indoor devices
>> to to the same as well.
>
> I've put a DD-WRT build on a couple of Cisco WRT320Ns, and they can work
> in client-bridge mode. Currently one is spare and I'm only actually
> using one of them, in my bedroom to connect it to the rest of the LAN,
> the rest of which is cabled. Mostly it's worked pretty well, though
> there is some dependency on what the source of the WiFi connection is.
> When my router was a DrayTek, ISTR some gotchas, though I'd have to cast
> around for previous posts to recall them now. My current router is a
> BTHH5a with an OpenWRT build, and that is problem free, everything I've
> tried works exactly as it should.
>

Buy a proper mesh network. I’ve messed around with all sorts of WiFi
extenders and bridges over the years. Mesh network kit works properly and
can be easily added to if need be. The nodes are designed to either use
5GHz or wired Ethernet as backhaul. So if you can run a mix and match,
useful if you can get an Ethernet cable to a node. As regards outside, I’ve
put my nodes on the window sill both at the back and front of the house. I
can easily get connection 150 metres distant. It works a lot more reliably
and faster than a power line link I had.

On 14/01/2022 16:15, Tweed wrote:
>
> Tony Gamble <tonygamble@compuserve.com> wrote:
>>
>> But the question is whether my 20 metres and solid brick Victorian walls
>> will stifle the signal? I am not sure how I try without making the
>> commitment.
>
> If you have the existing router up and running and it does 5GHz you can
> wander round with a portable device and get a feeling for how well 5GHz
> propagates around your property.

For example, WiFi Analyzer by Kevin Yuan is pretty good for Android, I
fairly regularly use v3.11.2, and it's FOC though with ads. It can give
you a readout of either 5GHz or 2.4GHz, and a desirable level of signal
is usually considered to be around -70dBm.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.farproc.wifi.analyzer&hl=en

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 14/01/2022 17:18, Tweed wrote:
>
> Buy a proper mesh network. I’ve messed around with all sorts of WiFi
> extenders and bridges over the years. Mesh network kit works properly and
> can be easily added to if need be. The nodes are designed to either use
> 5GHz or wired Ethernet as backhaul. So if you can run a mix and match,
> useful if you can get an Ethernet cable to a node. As regards outside, I’ve
> put my nodes on the window sill both at the back and front of the house. I
> can easily get connection 150 metres distant. It works a lot more reliably
> and faster than a power line link I had.

Why, when my existing system is perfectly adequate, and cost me nothing
except the time to flash the firmware of an old router and to learn how
to configure it?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 17:18, Tweed wrote:
>>
>> Buy a proper mesh network. I’ve messed around with all sorts of WiFi
>> extenders and bridges over the years. Mesh network kit works properly and
>> can be easily added to if need be. The nodes are designed to either use
>> 5GHz or wired Ethernet as backhaul. So if you can run a mix and match,
>> useful if you can get an Ethernet cable to a node. As regards outside, I’ve
>> put my nodes on the window sill both at the back and front of the house. I
>> can easily get connection 150 metres distant. It works a lot more reliably
>> and faster than a power line link I had.
>
> Why, when my existing system is perfectly adequate, and cost me nothing
> except the time to flash the firmware of an old router and to learn how
> to configure it?
>

Because you aren’t the OP

On 14/01/2022 17:33, Tweed wrote:
>
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 14/01/2022 17:18, Tweed wrote:
>>>
>>> Buy a proper mesh network. I’ve messed around with all sorts of WiFi
>>> extenders and bridges over the years. Mesh network kit works properly and
>>> can be easily added to if need be. The nodes are designed to either use
>>> 5GHz or wired Ethernet as backhaul. So if you can run a mix and match,
>>> useful if you can get an Ethernet cable to a node. As regards outside, I’ve
>>> put my nodes on the window sill both at the back and front of the house. I
>>> can easily get connection 150 metres distant. It works a lot more reliably
>>> and faster than a power line link I had.
>>
>> Why, when my existing system is perfectly adequate, and cost me nothing
>> except the time to flash the firmware of an old router and to learn how
>> to configure it?
>
> Because you aren’t the OP

Then why reply to me, rather than the OP?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Fri 14/01/2022 11:24, NY wrote:
> "Chris Green" <cl@isbd.net> wrote in message
> news:8218bi-7k9l.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu...
>
>> It *may* be because we have an 'all RCBO' consumer unit and it is
>> quite a big house so cable runs are quite long.  We're also a TT
>> installation, though I really can't see how this would affect it.
>
> Ah, I wonder if RCDs and MCBs can shunt the powerline signal
> live-to-neutral at the CU.
>
> Our old house had one RCD, between the CU and the meter, and used fuses
> on all circuits. This house has one RCD per ring main (ie they are
> within the CU) and uses MCBs on all circuits.

It occurs to me that one thing that could cause issues is/are RCBOs.
These individual RCD/MCB combined units must have some inductance in the
sensing coil which I guess could affect signals that need to pass
through to go out and come back in on a different circuit. This would of
course not occur where there is a common RCD that trips the incoming
mains but leaves the MCBs with a common input which have no sensing per se.