This topic has been marked solved and closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
Thanks for response but you have not answered my question.
First of all let's clarify topology of connections or layout scheme. You mentioned "star" topology where a master PL device talks to a number
of remote PL devices. I am interested in 3 PL device pairs where each pair establishes topology: single poin-to-point link, however all 6 PL devices are on one electrical circuit. Will these XAVB1601 devices work without interefering between these three data links?
All PL share the same L0/L1 network, where L2 (MAC) and L3 (e.g. IP) is run on. There is neither a "master" not a point-to-point relation. Each PL does see any other PL device on the same electrical wire(s). The PL with the same name are able to communicate.
So, Netgear PL device supports OSI seven layers system, where L0 - medium (copper), L1 - physical (bits), L2 - MAC (data link
addressing frames), L3 - network packets IP addressing and L6 - data presentation and encryption.
Layers L2 and L3 and in addition LAN tags and ToS routing are implemented when QoS is activated through Power Utility app. To make in my application 3 pairs of PL to communicate in point-to-point fashion I need to setup for each pair of PL's the same encryption key (password ).
Mistaken I'm afraid - PL connects to the power network L0 does create above a plain flat L1/L2 system like a plain simple network hub - not a switch! The isolation between the different networks is done on an encryption scheme on the L2 layer. Almost anything above L3 and up can pass over it.
Even if you set it up in pairs of two with each pair having the same key, they are still using the same shared media (roughly L0 and L1) - it's not VLAN technology. The more concurrent PL system are on the same wires (and in the neighborhood) and using same PLC standard the slower the system. If different standard/proprietary implementations above, the performance will break down much more, because of the different implementations don't "listen" to each other.
Not sure what your intention is - substituting three individual network cables over a shared media?
You have been very inaccurately dealing with definitions about various layers. How encryption can be related to layer L2 ?
Data Presentation and Encryption is related always to layer L6.
Boahahahahahahahaha!!!
Not everything does fit to academic definitions as what they teach you at school.
Since about 1987, we have deployed Ethernet MAC based encryption controllers in finance and government (read: defense) applications with Digital Equipment Corporation... Everything happened on the Data Link Layer ... that's L2 in the OSI model my friend. Google for Digital Ethernet Secured Network Controllers (DESNC) and VAX Key Distribution Center or read the 11th National Computer Security Conference: Proceedings, 17-20 October, 1988 , p.219 ff.
Decades later, IEEE 802.1AE was introduced. Together with IEEE 802.1X this allows the negotiation and dynamic update of keys - as used for example on business class wireless access points where each user does authenticate against the AP and every user client session does run on a dedicated key pair. Even your home WiFi with it's dead simple and shabby PSK and your Powerline devices do L2 encryption.
Everywhere Ethernet data is flowing over potentially insecure connection (satellite, p2p wireless links, fiber, copper, ...) L2 encryption is still sate of the art - look around with Thales (SafeNet/Gemalto) or Crypto International. 10GbE on full wirespeed, without adding reasonable latency, or 100 GbE using a a multiplex of these encryptors.
Another popular example is e.g. LTE - thee are bunches of different encryption levels, some with key derivation - ways below the effective IP traffic - everything happens on L1 and L2.
Let me have the last laughter in this discussion with you. I am a retired telecommunications engineer with almost 50 years
experience in various fields of telecommunications engineering. Yes, theres is a difference among academic science in electric/electronic
engineering and the practical engineering. A production engineer strives in short time to come up with a workable system/device but scientists ( in academia ) looks for a long term perfection.
You mentioned about encryption made in layer L2. I can bring up another example where an encryption is done in layer L1 for
DWDM OTN ( optical device ). The reasons for that is to decrease overhead bits in a frame ( as you know each layer of theoretical seven layer OSI adds more overhead bits. In my opinion, this is the main reason when practical engineering neglects the theory in data communications.
