From: GA.MCL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Mark C. Lawrence)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers.house
Subject: Re: Help !! == cable TV on second floor ==
Date: 15 Dec 1992 17:05:38 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1992Dec15.204448.15294@csrd.uiuc.edu>,
poulsen@sp91.csrd.uiuc.edu (David K. Poulsen) writes:
>lin@cdin-1.compu.com (Lin Chen) writes:
>>   We have cable TV cable run to the family room on the first floor and like
>>to be able to have cable TV also in the second floor bedroom. I believe I have
>>two options :
>>       1) run a cable to the second floor,
>>Solution 1) seems difficult to do as it has to be done between walls, but it
>>should provide better signal quality. Is this a possable DIY ? Do I need
>>some kind of signal enhancer for the cable to travel about 30 ft to the
>>second floor ? Does this have any thing to do with the cable company ?
>
>I have run table around my house inside the walls in a number of places.
>If you can find some place to tap into it (with a splitter) then all you
>need to do is figure out how to route it from here to there.  It's easy to get
>from a crawlspace or basement onto the first floor - just drill a hole in the
>floor near a convenient wall or baseboard.  Going from the first to the second
>floor can be done via running inside uninsulated walls or *cold* air returns
>(I don't know if this violates code but doubt if it would ever be a serious
>issue).
This is ok under (USA) NEC if you use plenum-rated (CL2P or CL3P) cable.  You
may have trouble finding this cable at home-handyperson type places; you might
need to go to an industrial/commercial electronics or wholesale electric
place.  An example of suitable cable is Belden 82240.  You want RG-59 or RG-6
type cable, U.L. listed as type CL2P or CL3P.
>
>As for cable companies trying to charge you for extra lines, well...
>I can't see how they can do this.  In the first place, many builders construct
>homes prewired for cable into every room.  They're not going to charge you for
>all those lines unless they're actually hooked up and being used.  So, it should
>not be legal for them to charge you for just having the wires in your house.

I agree it shouldn't be; whether it is, I can't say.

>As far as them charging you for using more outlets than they know about, they
>would have to have pretty sensitive TDM equipment (or similar), located pretty
                                     ^^^
I assume you mean TDR (time domain reflectometer).

>close to your house, in order to even detect that you had multiple taps on
>your line.  I doubt if most cable companies have the manpower and equipment
>budgets to mount such a search.  When in doubt, when the cable truck is parked
>near your house, just disconnect extra TVs (no need to disconnect splitters,

If you use an active (amplified) splitter, they won't be able to see what's
beyond it in any case.

>etc., as I said, I can't see how they could possibly charge you for having
>unused outlets wired up in your house).

They've gotten away with some strange stuff in the past.  Maybe with
re-regulation some of these abuses will be curbed.  You might want to read
your service agreement with the cable company to see what you've agreed to.

Mark C. Lawrence
Systems Programmer     Internet: M.Lawrence@Forsythe.Stanford.edu
Stanford Data Center     Bitnet: M.Lawrence@STANFORD
Stanford, CA 94305-4136     Tel: (415) 723-4976