[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Neil Stone wrote: > >>> a) whats the max length of cat 5 we can use. >> >> >> >> erk. Isn't it 200m ? >> > > I think it is 250M CAT-5 is suppose to give you 100Mbs ethernet at 100m I believe. I remember we were close to limits cabling a relatively small office with the switch in a closet dead center, given the cable runs are rarely straight to where you want them to go. In that environment correct working of fullduplex 100Mbps networking was vital as people were playing with 100MB CAD files all day long. I've seen 175m quoted for CAT-5 without an technical detail I assume you get slowers speeds through longer cables, so that might be okay for 10Mbps. However I've been network troubleshooting in cheapo wired offices which were pushing cabling limits and the outcome is not pleasant. So I would suggest you cable assuming 100Mbps networking limits if you ever want to be able to upgrade reliably, usually this just means locating switches or hubs in a nice central location. Of course in those days I knew the cabling limits by heart :-) As regards wireless, whilst microwave is nominally a line of sight technology it will happily go through all sorts of things you can't see through, as your eyes don't work with microwaves. This is why it seems so hit and miss. Also you can get reflections as the signal only has to be just above noise levels to work these days. Typically microwaves go through anything that doesn't get hot quick in a microwave oven, plastic and some dry building materials are usually fine. Metal and water (and sugar presumably, should you live in a fairy tale cottage) will kill microwave transmissions. The frequency is a few centimeters, so vegetation, or wire mesh fencing may be an issue, even though light goes through fine, it may diffract microwaves. Wireless is convenient and fine for many purposes, but cable is more reliable and faster. If you like the wireless approach but are concerned about the limitations, go with access points that support wireless bridging, as you can then always extend the range with a well placed hub and antennas. Most wireless suppliers of repute will offer a site survey if you have any doubts, but it may well be more expensive than buying a few extra hubs, or borrowing some kit and trying it out for a small deployment. Two laptops with 2 PCMCIA cards, and maybe an antenna or two, should prove whether it is likely to work without a survey. Surveys came in when wireless access points were 650 quid, and cards 150 quid, and wireless bridging was vapourware, now the bridging hubs are down around the 150 quid mark, and the PCMCIA cards down to 30 quid, you can buy a small network for the price of a survey. Doing a small building I wouldn't bother with survey, if I was asked to do several hundred desktops somewhere, I'd go with a survey, if only because if it didn't work afterwards the repercussions are probably enough to sink small IT companies. Gamers may find that wireless latencies are significantly more (and less predictable) than wired networks. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/ZY8rGFXfHI9FVgYRApbQAJ9F9xSN/BL9IIgPC12v1ZQr5OgRyQCeIXcp QPdx4dUAeVsGYUimLJUIF6A= =CNiS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.