Homepna - Not dead yet?

[rw120555]

I keep thinking Homepna is dead, but then it shows occasional signs of life, such as this. Here is an excerpt:

San Ramon, California, September 05, 2002 - The Home Phoneline Networking Alliance HomePNA), an organization driving the development and adoption of a single Phoneline networking standard, today announced the approval of a joint technology proposal by Broadcom Corporation (NASDAQ: BRCM) and CopperGate Communication, Inc. for the HomePNA 3.0, next generation specification. Technologies developed by the two companies have been integrated to reach an unprecedented throughput rate of 128 Mbps and to enable Quality of Service (QoS) for reliable content delivery to the end-user.

The rest of the release talks about stuff like hdtv, digital audio, entertainment centers...looks like they are thinking well beyond just your typical file and internet sharing. I've heard before that hpna 3.0 was about a year away -- I wonder how soon wireless and powerline might reach 128 mbps speeds?

 

[ye110man]

why would homepna die? it's cheaper than 802.11b and more reliable and very often faster. it's cleaner than wired ethernet and there's no need to run lines all around your house. the only thing holding it back is limited marketing.

 

[rw120555]

ye110man, as a homepna user, I'd be the last one to argue with you about the merits of hpna. I don't think there is any way a wireless-only system would work well in my house.

But, the marketing issue is non-trivial. I can't find hpna stuff on store shelves anymore, Netgear just dropped the PE102, the homepna.org web pages pail by comparison with the homplug.org pages. But, maybe it is mostly a retreat until 3.0 comes out. The original homeplug stuff was a disaster, but the new stuff seems to have learned a lot from earlier mistakes, both in terms of technology and marketing. Similarly, HPNA 3.0 could do very well if it lives up to its billing and is marketed right. Still, it wouldn't shock me if the idea just got abandoned because other technologies were doing so well.

 

[lobadobadingdong]

The problem with homopna is that you have to have telephone cables run to wherevery your computers are. Many people with kids don't want a telephone line in their kids rooms so wireless is the way to go. And I've never ecountered a situation yet where home office users actually needed the extra bandwidth over the 11MB(actual data tranfer rates approx 5-6MB/s after overhead). And I definatly wouldn't call hope pna more reliable! I have yet to have a wirless nic die, but have been to several houses with a homepna system that has cratered at least once, although it is somewhat cheaper as you don't need to purchase a hub, but routing is out the window. On the other hand you don't absolutly have to have an Access Point with wireless(adhoc network) unless you need the extended range, who here has a house over 250mx250m, or a metal frame house over 100mx100m? I'm not bashing it completly as it has it's usefullness in a few environments, but most people seem to prefer going with a router/wireless configuration that home pna as noboy has taken offers from me to install a homepna system over the wireless network. Mostly, because home pna shuts down your ability to use dsl throught the pna line, but should work well for those on cable.

 

[rw120555]

routing is out the window

Not true, although I am not surprised you think that way. All you need is an HPNA/ethernet bridge, such as the netgear PE102 or Linksys hpb200. Or, some routers have hpna support built in, such as the Netgear rp334, 2Wire Homeportal, Linksys hpro200. But, when I first bought my Homepna stuff, I had no idea I could use a router -- my Intel cards documentation said nothing about it, perhaps because Intel didn't sell the necessary equipment.

I think a lot of hpna stuff was junky, poorly marketed, and had crummy user interfaces. But, there is good stuff out there. It looks to me like Powerline has learned from some of hpna's mistakes and is being handled better.

 

[rw120555]

Also, with regards to dsl and hpna peacefully coexisting on the same phone line -- it works fine. Here is an excerpt from Homepna.org:

"FAQ 1 Can I use my telephone, DSL, modem, fax and answering machines with a HomePNA network?

Yes, standard telephones, V.90 (56K) and other dial up analog modems, faxes and answering machines, as well as DSL service can be used simultaneously with HomePNA because, even though they exist on the same telephone wires, they occupy different frequency bands."

As the FAQ further explains, you may just have to fiddle around with filters is all. Plenty of dsl providers sell the 2wire homeportal 100 and 1000, touting their built-in hpna abilities; and my router, the netgear rp334, has instructions for connecting to dsl providers while also using the router's built-in hpna.

 

[ye110man]

my more reliable i meant that in certain corners of my house i can't get 802.11b. homepna is possibly more secure too.
unless you're using a laptop, homepna is just an convenient too. everybody's got a phonline in the room. it doesn't even have to be an active phoneline.

but marketing is the big problem. most people still don't know that homepna even exists. homepna 1.0 wasn't ready for primetime and that might have had an adverse effect on the public.

 

[CumulusTech]

First: HPNA works over POTS telephone wires. Single pair, twisted or not, up to 1,000 feet (HPNA 1.0). The 1 Mbit/sec bandwidth choke is a static choke. It is not adaptive with distance. HPNA 2.0 chipsets were just discontinued by Broadcom. However, AMD also makes this chipset with different electrical settings (let's not get into that). HPNA 1.0 will work over phone lines with ADSL, SDSL, or IDSL running concurrently. However, popular xDSL's like the up and coming vDSL at 15 Mbps are not compatible on the same pair. I don't know who told you that HPNA won't work on the same line as ADSL, they were wrong.

Second: I'm assuming you are installing CPE (customer premise equipment) as an uplink router so to say. You are using HPNA modems to pass through back into the phonelines. This is a very stable configuration (DSL or Cable Modem --> Router @eth (DHCP) --> HPNA modem @uplink --> Phoneline into wall jack @HPNA) as you can now pull a line out of any jack on the same telephone number and put it into a modem in normal mode (not uplink) and directly connect w/ your router. However, HPNA does suffer from port density issues. True: it is a point to multi-point solution. HOWEVER, it cannot support more than 24 nodes in one port. My tests have maxed out a single port to ~ 15 nodes.

Finally: HPNA is MUCH MUCH more stable than any off-the-shelf 802.11b crap out there. Be it Linksys, Dlink, Yada Yada Yada. The quality stuff will cost you a hefty sum and those products are called Cisco Aironet and Proxim's stuff (you already know this). 802.11a = much better in the homes as it isn't as strict on the NLOS (near line of sight) req's. If you are lighting up a house and want something stable and clean, go with HPNA. If you need someone to do it, send me an email.

Personal Note: I've done my share of war driving across the area I'm from looking for unsecured 802.11b networks w/ only an Orinoco and my palm-sized antenna. I've thought about walking up to these homeowners and kicking them in the shin.

 

[rw120555]

Thanks for the info cumulustech. I'm sure a 15 node limit won't bother most home users, and a WAP with 15 users probably wouldn't work too well either. Do you have any experience with powerline? How do you think it compares with homepna?

The marketing of hpna still confuses me. You say Broadcom has discontinued making 2.0 chips, but here is an Aug.24, 2002 compbeat.com interview with Broadcom's Stephen Palm talking about how great hpna is. Also, I can't find hpna stuff on store shelves, but this article talks about the great success 2wire has had selling its homepna devices through dsl providers. So, maybe the stuff just isn't being sold through stores much anymore but it is being sold.

I'm thinking homepna 2.0 may be more or less dead, but manufacturers are gearing up for 3.0.

As far as stability and performance goes, I have both wireless and hpna, and it has certainly been my experience that the hpna works better. The wireless is nice for moving the laptop around, but there are a lot of dead spots. Of course, my experiences may not be typical.

 

[CumulusTech]

rw120555:

I've tried some powerline for testing purposes and found it to be reliable up to about 150 ft. At this distance, I haven't seen impedance in the wire to become a problem. Keep in mind that powerline (as I understand it) is affected as more appliances are added to the circuit.

802.11a stuff works GREAT! If you must do wireless in a home, go with "a" or wait for "g". I don't like those AP's out there on the market for home users because generally.. they suck. The Linksys is as stable as they come and even then.. ugh. IP lock-ups as you add more computers. It's just a bunch of yuck with wireless AP/router combos.

I use a lot of different equipment for the business I'm in. If you're looking for a reliable manufacturer, I can direct you to the right people. Especially if you want HPNA equipment or need help with an HPNA network, shoot me an email at jay@cumulustech.com.

 

[JackMDS]

This is not really a Technology issue, but a business issue.

The HPNA did not sell big, as a result most components stayed relatively expensive.

HPNA3 has a chance if it will come out with competitive prices.

The same goods that are sold to Pros are much more expensive at the consumer market. As an example 10? CAT5 straight cable that can be found commercially for $2, it cost $12 when you buy it "Belkin style", the HPNA is sold "Consumer style".

The HPNA manufactures know that it is mainly sold to not very sophisticated entry level consumers, and they can not resist fleecing them.