How to have several identical wireless doorbells respond to the same code?

Well, I *am* using it and it's fine, as I previously mentioned.

I don't have a NAS so I cannot answer your question.

That's very good news! (Remind me how WiFi through the mains works, as I thought the "Wi" part is short for "wireless".)

MM

Well I have dennis killfiled but in the interst of accruate info

My TP link will sustain about 60Mpbs simplex over the mains.

That's a shade better than my wifi which is around 30Mbps simplex.

If I add a third TP link to the powerline network, performance evaporates and the whole system locks up after a while. I conclude that the collision detection is utter crap.

None of thes can touch te 100Mbps full duplex that a decent cat 5 canb sustain and not only that, without isssues from other machiness on the network exchanging traffic at the same trime.

Conclusin. Powerline is OK for one PC to connect to one router remotely for onternet only.

It's a little better than most wifi.

Neither are a patch on CAT 5 wired. Especially to NAS.

Its not actually legal as if it does cause interference with licensed frequencies you can be done. At the least they will take the offending equipment away and destroy it at your expense.

I know, I posted the Ofcom link about 'bad units'. An approved unit isn't itself illegal, however it could 'be' illegal if it isn't conforming to the specification.

No they won't. They will ask you to cease using it and only if you don't, might they take it further.

The only time they might confiscate any such equipment is if it's illegal to be used in the country in question (frequency allocation / power etc), is being used illegally (legal CB with illegal amp or pirate radio station) or you don't refrain from using it when asked.

And I'm not even talking about what they can do, I'm talking about what they are likely to do.

Cheers, T i m

back in the 1980s there was someone with a piece of equipment that was radiatoing over the public broadcast bands. He wouldn't allow the RIS access to his property. so he was charged with operating an unlicenced transmitter - in such a way that it became a criminal offence, the police obtained a search warrant and his item (video sender, I think) was seized and he ended up in court - and it cost him!

We had no end of intermittent problems with a repeater especially on one or two segments.

Had to get specialists in, with fancy equipment and they were scratching their heads. For some reason I happened to measure the shielded earth to a socket earth - there were volts there!!

Yep the offices was two houses, joined together, the front being on one transformer and phase and the back being on a different transformer and phase with earth differences. Sparky redid the fuse boxes/earths etc and no more problems. A long time ago but I don't think the two supplies into one property was a permissable arrangement for similar reasons to the problems we encountered.

You are only supposed to have one earth on a thin/thick ethernet cable. The actual signal bit is via isolating transformers so you could have

The same is true for "CAT" wiring except you don't need a screen or earth except to stop your equipment radiating cr@p. With screened cables they should only have an electrical earth at one end and maybe a capacitive earth at the other. They should not connect the electrical or the mains earth together to avoid problems like earth potential differences. You need several mm2 cable if you want to connect earths together not a networking cable. We used 70 mm2 earths for the project we did with BBC labs which I thought was a bit OTT but that's what the maths said.

Had that problem. We had a nicely refurbed computer room, with the 'old' one at one end and the 'new' one at the other. Two separate power inlets, the 'old' one being direct mains, and the 'new' one being via a motor alternator.

All worked OK until we were testing a homebrew operating system on the new machine; this used a PDP-11 as the front end. We kept getting unexplained parity errors on the interface between the PDP-11 and the new machine.

It took them a long time to switch the PDP-11 to the same power inlet (and earth) as its companion. It had been there for a while, in another incarnation, and was ol the 'old' power.

I turned up at a mates works for a cuppa and we got looking at an issue they had been having for a while when trying to join 3 Thin Ethernet repeaters together.

They had substituted and swapped around repeaters but with no improvement.

Whilst standing there with my tea in front of this comms rack I asked if they had any spare patch leads to try swapping out the neat 6" long cables that were currently joining the repeaters together. They found some 1m leads, swapped the short ones out and everything then 'just worked'. I thought I'd remember there being a minimum length (.6m?) for a thin Ethernet cable and it seemed to be the case.

He asked me why the 'consultant' hadn't spotted that and of course I couldn't answer. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

I bet!

Silly not to have co-operated though eh?

Cheers, T i m

Yes, but that's because you're an idiot.

I've tried two different EoP boxen and they both have the same problem; regular dropouts when the bandwidth drops to zero. Apparently, from asking around, this is not uncommon. I'm not minded to spend any more money.