longer range/phoneline ethernet

[sprdave]

We want an ethernet connection from the house to shop. Wireless probably isn't an option, for one there's not line of sight (trees in the way). There is a phone line from the house, a wire pair used for phone, another pair or two free (unused). The wire length is around 950-1000 feet.

Is there something economical to network over the phone wire? There is phoneline networking for houses but Im having trouble finding much and what I've seen is "up to" 1000 feet, probably not sufficient.

 

[wuench]

Not really using that wire, you are way out of spec on distance and you would need a minimum of 3 pair, unless you wanted to use modems and work at that speed/bandwidth 56Kish. You can either trench some fiber, or you could use a point-to-point wireless bridge with directional antennas. And cut down some trees.

Actually you could try an outdoor wireless solution, some of them have a lot of power. It might work without getting out the chainsaw... Look at some of those Ubiquity WiMax solutions, I just ordered a Picostation AP to see if I can improve my signal.

 

[apostolakisl]

I am going to say the following, but doubt it will work at that distance.

The ethernet over power lines. Your shop would have to be on the same main service panel for it to have any prayer. But 1000 ft is probably a no go.

I'll agree with wuench that your most likely solution is a directional wifi transmitter/receiver. They may blast right through the trees at that distance. Line of sight on many of those systems is measured in miles, so 1/5 mile will likely tolerate some soft obstructions like tree leaves.

 

[sprdave]

I was thinking something like dsl...it goes miles over a copper pair, and sufficient speed for our needs....maybe not practical for this?

 

[apostolakisl]

While it obviously exists, I've never seen a device sold that converts to a DSL signal, a reverse modem of sorts. It would probably be very expensive.

 

[wuench]

You might be able to pick up some used ISDN or ADSL equipment on Ebay. I've only done ISDN in labs but it should work over a single pair. Not familiar enough with ADSL. But if you maybe look for some Cisco lab examples or on some of the CCNP/CCIE study sites you can probably find a minimum list of the cheapest equipment required to get it working and maybe even some example configs....

 

[HAI_fjh]

Just some ideas:

For 1000' point-to-point wireless with directional antennas may not require cutting down any trees. Yes trees will reduce the signal strength but a few trees will probably not reduce it enough to be a problem. Now if you were going 15 miles and there was a forest in between...

You mentioned something about a phone line with extra pairs. If the phone line belongs to the phone company then you can't do anything with the extra pairs. you could probably contact them to get DSL to the shop but probably not too economical.

If the wire is yours there are a number of protocol converters, blauns and short haul modems that can can achieve fairly high data rates but all of the ones I am aware of will require at least 2 pairs. Check out someplace like blackbox.com and see if they have anything useful.

Keeping with the who owns the wire theme: 1000' feet is too far for UTP Ethernet, but not for fiber. Is it possible to run fiber next to the phone line? Again assuming we are not talking about the phone companies polls.

Personally I am thinking the point to point wireless may be the best solution.

 

[BraveSirRobbin]

I agree with the above, but wanted to add that in your case, I would go with 900MHz as that would be a more capable frequency vs something like 2.5 or 5 GHz.

 

[gatchel]

I was thinking something like dsl...it goes miles over a copper pair, and sufficient speed for our needs....maybe not practical for this?

You are absolutely correct. BlackBox makes a DSL ethernet extender for dry copper just like the you are looking for. I used one about 7 years ago for an internet connetion to a barn over CAT3 twisted pair cabling. It got about 10 to 15 meg at about 1000' or so. It worked very well and I can't remember ever having an issue in 5 or so years of it being installed.

I will try to search out the part number and get back to you.

Edit:

http://www.blackbox..../LB200A%c4%82R3

$620.00


While I like a hard wired solution over wireless anyday, you may want to consider the Ubiquiti Networks wireless products in the 900mhz band. It might be about 1/3 the cost...

Look into the Nanostation or the Nanostation Loco or even the NanoBridge Products. They are around $100 or less per end and are easy to configure. I have used a Nanostation Loco M5 to link a garage to a house at 200' and get over 150Mbps of throughput on the link.

 

[Linwood]

Maybe something like this?

http://www.ubnt.com/bulletm

and just forget the copper? With the normal range so much larger I suspect the trees might not be a problem (emphasis on "might").

I have never used them, just heard of them.

 

[apostolakisl]

I'm pretty sure you'd have to have a hell of a thick forest for a high strength directional wifi antenna to not get through it at 1000ft. You can find these systems for pretty cheap as well and they are not challenging to install.

 

[tmbrown97]

You actually have a couple options...

1. Do a google search for ethernet extender vdsl - vdsl is an option that uses 1 pair generally and can get you 100mb over 1000 ft. There are a lot of options.

2. If it's Cat5 you can series some extenders... veracity makes one that you can daisy chain every 100m (300ft) to make the distance - and can go up to gigabit. You use a really strong POE injector at one end and it powers the injectors every 100m - and you can daisy chain to reach your distance.

3. Wireless. Wireless is a science unto its own, and one I've spend the last year working extensively with. Basically, the lower the frequency, the better the penetration of objects; but the slower the speeds. 900Mhz will blow through non-line of sight, but unless you use a huge channel width, the speeds will be very slow. To get 150mb-type-speeds, you need clear line of sight. Since it's only 1000ft, you could probably get a 2.5ghz point-to-point setup to work blasting through trees and get about 45mb... Ubiquiti has some very affordable options. I can help with those if you need.

 

[gatchel]

Maybe something like this?

http://www.ubnt.com/bulletm

and just forget the copper? With the normal range so much larger I suspect the trees might not be a problem (emphasis on "might").

I have never used them, just heard of them.

That is just a radio. You'll still need an antenna. The ones I posted are full radio / antenna all in one.

 

[gatchel]

sprdave,

Call streakwave wireless and speak to one of their sales / applications people. See if they will let you email them line of sight picture. They will give you a straight answer.

http://www.streakwave.com/

I don't work there or have any affiliation with them. I have had success there with orders in the past.

 

[tmbrown97]

The Bullet's are also single chain (single polarity) devices, and as such capable of a max of ~65mbps... The only reason normally to use a Bullet is if you're just replacing older equipment and want them to connect to existing antennas. For what you're trying to do, a pair of NanoStation Loco M2's would probably do just fine and get you over 100mb. There's also the nanostation 900mhz model but it costs about triple (per end). If you want to do wireless, it'd be no biggie to drop $98 on to M2 Loco's and see what happens. Any good wireless engineer will tell you 2.4ghz isn't going to pass through trees/foilage - they don't want the callback if it doesn't work 100%... but the reality is you'll see installations all the time where people shoot through buildings or trees, or don't leave sufficient fresnel zone clearance, etc - and it still works.

Otherwise if you like using a single pair of wires from the phone lines that's already run, that Startech VDSL unit would fit the bill very easily. Basically hook ethernet into one port, a phone jack to a free pair of wires on the other, and you'll be probably around 75mb. According to their datasheet, you'll get 10mb up to 1KM (~3800ft); at 300m (985ft) it says it should be at 75mbps.

Of course wired vs wireless can't be measured the same... the wireless stuff won't have a single chain over ~65mb; but the idea is multiple file transfers going both directions, you can have close to 300mb at a single time because they're going in opposite directions and opposite polarities; if you were to do a single file transfer of a 10gb file, that 75mb VDSL will be faster; if you have several devices going at once, you'll probably get better performance over wireless. The radios also have built in QoS for voice/video if the originating devices tag the packets properly.

It's really just a matter of preference - either one should work fine... the wireless might be perceived as faster because of the multi-chain and qos, and it's cheaper... the vdsl absolutely the easiest way in the world and will likely be the most reliable - and won't require any new learning.