Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> 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?
>

Mea culpa

In article <xn0ncv1an2wfzd2006@news.individual.net>,
Jeff Gaines <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 13/01/2022 in message <xn0ncthcs19svj5001@news.individual.net> Jeff
> Gaines wrote:

> >Any thoughts/comment on powerline networks? There was a suggestion they
> >can cause RFI and I thought the combined knowledge in here would be able
> >to comment on that.

> Just to say thank you to everybody for all the input/discussion :-)

> 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, and that's how my tv gets its internet connection. Mine is made by
Devolo

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article <srri4i$ks1$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)
<briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> 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.

To cross phases, they have to go allthe way to the substation and back

> 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. Brian

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 14/01/2022 in message <59aac78eeacharles@candehope.me.uk> charles 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, and that's how my tv gets its internet connection. Mine is made by
>Devolo

If you have time to check the model I would much appreciate it :-)

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
This is as bad as it can get, but don't bet on it

On Fri 14/01/2022 21:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 in message <59aac78eeacharles@candehope.me.uk> charles 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, and that's how my tv gets its internet connection.  Mine is made by
>> Devolo
>
> If you have time to check the model I would much appreciate it :-)
>

TP-Link also do a single and a double, the former uses a micro USB 5V
supply, the double is a plug-in. They can be used as Rx or Tx access
points*, bridging links between two different networks, and several
other modes.
*They can sit on a cable and provide a wi-fi field, or they can be
connected to a cable and provide access to a wi-fi already present.

I use FR24 quite a lot for aircraft tracking. I have an aerial, USB
receiver, and a Raspberry Pi 3B in the loft connected to one of the
single TP-L units to give wi-fi connection to my domestic network. Works
a treat. (No, the RPi3B won't connect from its location.)

On 14/01/2022 10:16, Mark Carver wrote:
> I remember a few years ago driving in France trying to listen to R4
> Droitwich. There was interference when driving along side telephone cables.

Likewise in Ireland.

Bill

On 14/01/2022 13:34, Java Jive 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 have just looked at the user guide for my TL-WA860RE(UK) which has an
Ethernet port I can connect to my wired network to configure it, and it
says that when connected wirelessly to a router the Ethernet port is
available for Ethernet connections. I found the user guide on-line if
anyone wants to follow this up:
https://static.tp-link.com/2017/201711/20171129/1910011162_TL-WA860RE(UK)_V1_UG.pdf

I have never used the port for an output, but I suppose that if it is
then connected to an ethernet hub it would allow several wireless
connections from the router to be received by remote wired devices.

I haven't investigated further than that; my range extender is V1 and
the latest is V6. If anyone is interested enough to look at the spec of
a V6 (which should also be available from the TP Link website) then it
may have the same facility at better speeds.

Jim

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 22:03:45 +0000, Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com>
wrote:

>On Fri 14/01/2022 21:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>> On 14/01/2022 in message <59aac78eeacharles@candehope.me.uk> charles 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, and that's how my tv gets its internet connection.  Mine is made by
>>> Devolo
>>
>> If you have time to check the model I would much appreciate it :-)
>>
>
>TP-Link also do a single and a double, the former uses a micro USB 5V
>supply, the double is a plug-in. They can be used as Rx or Tx access
>points*, bridging links between two different networks, and several
>other modes.
>*They can sit on a cable and provide a wi-fi field, or they can be
>connected to a cable and provide access to a wi-fi already present.
>
>I use FR24 quite a lot for aircraft tracking. I have an aerial, USB
>receiver, and a Raspberry Pi 3B in the loft connected to one of the
>single TP-L units to give wi-fi connection to my domestic network. Works
>a treat. (No, the RPi3B won't connect from its location.)

All my TV stuff is fed through an Edimax EW-7228APn, which is a device
that can work in several modes, including "wireless bridge". It picks
up the wireless signal and provides 5 ethernet ports. It's quite old
and only works on 2.4GHz, but it does the job. I've found that the
5GHz signal is not very reliable more than two or three metres from
the router anyway.

If you're looking for a wireless bridge, some devices are sold simply
as wireless "access points" with no mention of other modes, even if
they have them. Some can also be configured to operate as bridges or
wireless repeaters, or pairs of them to create secure point-to point
links, but if you can't download the instructions, you may have to
check customer reviews or forum postings to see if anybody else who
has one knows what it can do.

Rod.

On 14/01/2022 22:03, Woody wrote:

>
> I use FR24 quite a lot for aircraft tracking. I have an aerial, USB
> receiver, and a Raspberry Pi 3B in the loft connected to one of the
> single TP-L units to give wi-fi connection to my domestic network. Works
> a treat. (No, the RPi3B won't connect from its location.)

I have a very similar setup except that aerial and Raspberry Pi are in
the detached garage, and connected using Devolo devices. You can see a
schematic of my Devolo network here:
https://app.box.com/s/6jsygni0x5rmzft6y7ttuk5irq5304b0

The garage has its Consumer Unit so the mains connection between that
and the rest of the house is less than direct - but the Devolo unit
still manages a respectable enough speed for relaying aircraft movements
to FlightRadar.
--
Cheers,
Roger

On 14/01/2022 21:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 in message <59aac78eeacharles@candehope.me.uk> charles 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, and that's how my tv gets its internet connection.  Mine is made by
>> Devolo
>
> If you have time to check the model I would much appreciate it :-)
>

See my other post. My Devolo network uses a mixture of 500 Duo's and 500
WiFi's. The Duo's have 2 ethernet ports but no WiFi. The central 'hub'
is one of those, with one port connected to the internet router and the
other one to my main computer. The WiFi units allow mobile phones, etc
to connect wirelessly - but also have one ethernet port to facilitate a
wired connection. The WiFi devices can be set to all have the same
password, so the connection is fairly seamless when you move around the
house with a portable device.

N.B. These devices don't take a WiFi *input* and relay it - the central
hub needs a wired input from the router.
--
Cheers,
Roger

In article <j4h3tnFim07U1@mid.individual.net>, Roger Mills
<mills37.fslife@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 21:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> > On 14/01/2022 in message <59aac78eeacharles@candehope.me.uk> charles
> > 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, and that's how my tv gets its internet connection. Mine is made
> >> by Devolo
> >
> > If you have time to check the model I would much appreciate it :-)
> >

> See my other post. My Devolo network uses a mixture of 500 Duo's and 500
> WiFi's. The Duo's have 2 ethernet ports but no WiFi. The central 'hub'
> is one of those, with one port connected to the internet router and the
> other one to my main computer. The WiFi units allow mobile phones, etc
> to connect wirelessly - but also have one ethernet port to facilitate a
> wired connection. The WiFi devices can be set to all have the same
> password, so the connection is fairly seamless when you move around the
> house with a portable device.

> N.B. These devices don't take a WiFi *input* and relay it - the central
> hub needs a wired input from the router. -

I, too, use 500 WiFi units.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:

>
> I, too, use 500 WiFi units.
>
That’s an awful lot. You must have a very large house :)

Ha ha.

I wonder if it would be possible to somehow utilise the mains without
creating the interference at these frequencies, I guess the attenuation if
you, say raised the start to say band 1 up, would be huge, and of course you
may then clobber a lot more services as well.
As a matter of interest, what sort of speeds are derived over the mains
using the current crappy interfaces?
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Tweed" <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ss0npl$rji$1@dont-email.me...
> charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> I, too, use 500 WiFi units.
>>
> That's an awful lot. You must have a very large house :)
>
>

On 15/01/2022 23:33, Roger Mills wrote:
>
> See my other post. My Devolo network uses a mixture of 500 Duo's and 500
> WiFi's. The Duo's have 2 ethernet ports but no WiFi. The central 'hub'
> is one of those, with one port connected to the internet router and the
> other one to my main computer. The WiFi units allow mobile phones, etc
> to connect wirelessly - but also have one ethernet port to facilitate a
> wired connection. The WiFi devices can be set to all have the same
> password, so the connection is fairly seamless when you move around the
> house with a portable device.
>
> N.B. These devices don't take a WiFi *input* and relay it - the central
> hub needs a wired input from the router.

I have a perfectly sound system using the same kit - five Devolos in my
case.

I say sound in that it give me almost the same speed as comes out of my
BT router. Nothing spectacular but enough to stream a 4k movie from the
internet linked Nividia Shield.

What I did find is that some mains sockets are cleaner than others. In
my office I was using a Devolo ethernet link to my PC for convenience. I
then found that I got double the speed by using a wifi Devolo in a
socket the other side of the room and buying a USB wifi dongle for my
PC. Probably there were so many mains powered items such as hard drives
near the PC that it messed up what the Devolo was getting from the
nearby socket.

Radio interference? None that I am aware of.

Tony

Unless you managed to ensure all other mains-powered items presented a
linear load it becomes impossible to ensure no interference can ocur.

The basic reality is:

1) That home mains wiring isn't a simple transmission line with a fully
matched linear impedance for all wiring and connections. Nor is is all
'balanced' or 'unbalanced+shielded' to the same impedance, etc.

2) Many loads are non-linear, and often time-varying in the load the
present.

(1) means RF power will be radiated or coupled into nearby items.

(2) means that having the PLN device's output not us given bands is *not*
sufficient to ensure its output won't be frequency converted into those
bands by the home mains setup + other household items.

So in practice given that most users have no idea of the RF properties of
their house mains or the presented RF loading behaviour of their other
consumer goods, it becomes pot luck.

TBH the only other 'standard approval' I've ever seen that is as crazy as
this is HDMI! That gets away with it - mostly - as a result of people using
short 1 - 1 connections, not a branching network of cables.

Jim

In article <ss12bl$pqh$1@dont-email.me>,
Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> I wonder if it would be possible to somehow utilise the mains without
> creating the interference at these frequencies,

--
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

On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 12:16:52 -0000, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
<briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> As a matter of interest, what sort of speeds are derived over the mains
>using the current crappy interfaces?

I no longer use them, but recall speeds of around 70-80Mb/s in a
fairly modern not particularly big terrace house. This was in excess
of my internet speeds and enough for the occasional need to copy files
between computers, so good enough for me. The devices would work on
extension cables but speeds could be as low as half of the above, so I
always plugged them directly into the wall sockets.

My reason for putting them aside in favour of an ethernet cable to my
main desktop computer was occasional loss of connection which I could
only cure by switching off and restarting. Since they were of the
mains pass-through variety and powered other things such as the PC and
the modem/router, those things would also have to be restarted, which
was a big nuisance. Installing the ethernet cable was a pain, but
worth it in the end. The wireless connection to my TV streaming
devices via an Edimax ethernet bridge has never shown any problems so
I've left that alone.

Rod.

I hate hdmi. I had to use the D connector and an adaptor to drive my
monitor, since when you put the monitor in it takes all sound away from the
pc and shoves it to the monitor if it sees it has audio. There is too much
intelligence in some of those standard, no doubt presumed to be idiot proof.
I'm now told that most later windows 10 and 11 computers have to have an
active monitor on them to perform certain things. That is bloody stupid, as
the only time I need a monitor is when there has to be trouble shooting
done which locks out the screenreader.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Jim Lesurf" <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:59abb157f9noise@audiomisc.co.uk...
> Unless you managed to ensure all other mains-powered items presented a
> linear load it becomes impossible to ensure no interference can ocur.
>
> The basic reality is:
>
> 1) That home mains wiring isn't a simple transmission line with a fully
> matched linear impedance for all wiring and connections. Nor is is all
> 'balanced' or 'unbalanced+shielded' to the same impedance, etc.
>
> 2) Many loads are non-linear, and often time-varying in the load the
> present.
>
> (1) means RF power will be radiated or coupled into nearby items.
>
> (2) means that having the PLN device's output not us given bands is *not*
> sufficient to ensure its output won't be frequency converted into those
> bands by the home mains setup + other household items.
>
> So in practice given that most users have no idea of the RF properties of
> their house mains or the presented RF loading behaviour of their other
> consumer goods, it becomes pot luck.
>
> TBH the only other 'standard approval' I've ever seen that is as crazy as
> this is HDMI! That gets away with it - mostly - as a result of people
> using
> short 1 - 1 connections, not a branching network of cables.
>
> Jim
>
>
> In article <ss12bl$pqh$1@dont-email.me>,
> Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> I wonder if it would be possible to somehow utilise the mains without
>> creating the interference at these frequencies,
>
> --
> 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
>

Maybe then, its the way these devices code the signals that causes the
problem. Unfortunately, I've yet to find anywhere in this street where this
ticking and squealing noise is not louder than most radio stations on the
short wave bands. You can use noise blankers for the ticking but if using AM
the noise is audible on the carriers even if not between stations, and when
the devices are sending data, the squealing is awful.
I think somebody rigged two up by opening them and powering them from
batteries, and with just a few feet of wire as an aerial they could still
communicate between rooms. Thus this shows that in fact they are indeed
transmitters, and just polluting the RF spectrum due to the sheer peak
power and transmission mode needed to get anything through a mains cable.
Really sad.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Roderick Stewart" <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bj58ugdo4sv999mfbm5htn8s0v9aua4sbj@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 12:16:52 -0000, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
> <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> As a matter of interest, what sort of speeds are derived over the mains
>>using the current crappy interfaces?
>
> I no longer use them, but recall speeds of around 70-80Mb/s in a
> fairly modern not particularly big terrace house. This was in excess
> of my internet speeds and enough for the occasional need to copy files
> between computers, so good enough for me. The devices would work on
> extension cables but speeds could be as low as half of the above, so I
> always plugged them directly into the wall sockets.
>
> My reason for putting them aside in favour of an ethernet cable to my
> main desktop computer was occasional loss of connection which I could
> only cure by switching off and restarting. Since they were of the
> mains pass-through variety and powered other things such as the PC and
> the modem/router, those things would also have to be restarted, which
> was a big nuisance. Installing the ethernet cable was a pain, but
> worth it in the end. The wireless connection to my TV streaming
> devices via an Edimax ethernet bridge has never shown any problems so
> I've left that alone.
>
> Rod.

On 16/01/2022 12:16, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> Ha ha.
>
> I wonder if it would be possible to somehow utilise the mains without
> creating the interference at these frequencies, I guess the attenuation if
> you, say raised the start to say band 1 up, would be huge, and of course you
> may then clobber a lot more services as well.
> As a matter of interest, what sort of speeds are derived over the mains
> using the current crappy interfaces?
> Brian
>

My units theoretically run at 500 Mbps - but achive far less than that
in practice. They differ depending on where in the house they are, but
they average just under 200 Mbps - which is far faster than my internet
connection!
--
Cheers,
Roger

On 17/01/2022 17:30, Roger Mills wrote:
> On 16/01/2022 12:16, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>> Ha ha.
>>
>> I wonder if it would be possible to somehow utilise the mains without
>> creating the interference at these frequencies, I guess the
>> attenuation if
>> you, say raised the start to say band 1 up, would be huge, and of
>> course you
>> may then clobber a lot more services as well.
>>   As a matter of interest, what sort of speeds are derived over the mains
>> using the current crappy interfaces?
>>   Brian
>>
>
> My units theoretically run at 500 Mbps - but achive far less than that
> in practice. They differ depending on where in the house they are, but
> they average just under 200 Mbps - which is far faster than my internet
> connection!

That would be far slower than my 500 Mbps fibre to the home
connection..... ( I could have a 900 Mbps package if I wanted....)

Java Jive wrote:

> My current router is a BTHH5a with an OpenWRT build, and that is problem free

I presume you've stuck with v19.x ?

On 22/01/2022 22:21, Andy Burns wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
>
>> My current router is a BTHH5a with an OpenWRT build, and that is
>> problem free
>
> I presume you've stuck with v19.x ?

I've stuck with OpenWrt 18.06, as it seems to work alright.

--

Fake news kills!

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