# Dumb to install new Ethernet cable???



## jaguar325 (Jan 2, 2006)

I have been away from the forum for a while and have not been keeping pace with the discussions about DECA and MRV. It looks like a bit of homework is needed to figure out what it all means. I conceptually get the idea of sharing programming across D* boxes, which will be great for me because I've got 3 HD DVRs and 2 receivers and keeping up with what is recorded on which machine is becoming a pain. On top of that, I have an issue with sharing 2 DVRs between two different TVs, requiring expensive HDMI splitters (needed to keep "his and hers" programming separate but available in both places). 

With the recent addition of network-enabled A/V receiver and a TV that uses internet, I have also been looking to solve the need for internet access in places I have not had it before (without getting into the complications and hassles of more wireless access points). My solution was going to be installing either Cat5e or Cat6 cable runs to these places... it won't be easy but it's possible. These are the same places where my DVRs sit today (hooked to the internet via wireless). My concern with expanding wireless was bandwidth - figuring at some point, I'll be shipping enough HD media around the house that my current setup will start to cause problems.

With the coming of MRV and DECA, is it dumb to be putting in new Ethernet runs? I have plenty of coax in these spots -- some of which is not currently in use because I disconnected cable. Even if the D* devices get their networking capability via coax, I will still need to feed the A/V receiver and TV. I was also thinking of using one run of Cat6 to run HDMI over Ethernet in order to share an HR20 between two rooms. 

Your advice and help is appreciated!

Thanks,

Big K


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

If it isn't a high cost or effort expense, I see absolutely no reason not to lay down cat5.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

Run it. Who knows what else you will get in the future that might need it. Cat 5e is cheap, I just picked up 1000' for 40 bucks on eBay.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Personally I think that you'll be glad you did at some point... you may want another internet-connected device at that same location. Wireless is great but it's really no substitute for good, old-fashioned copper.


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

I have a theory. It goes something along the lines of:
(1) DECA adapter connected to your modem/router.
(X) DECA adapter(s) connected to a 5-port switch.
5-port switch connected to DirecTV HD DVR (for MRV, VOD, etc), TV (for internet-enabled functions), etc.

No-one can currently confirm or deny my theory will work.

Would you pay for DECA to be installed?
If you would, you might as well. Then if need-be you can move your wireless adapters that are on your receivers, to your TV's/etc, if my theory doesnt work out.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

CJTE said:


> I have a theory. It goes something along the lines of:
> (1) DECA adapter connected to your modem/router.
> (X) DECA adapter(s) connected to a 5-port switch.
> 5-port switch connected to DirecTV HD DVR (for MRV, VOD, etc), TV (for internet-enabled functions), etc.
> ...


I don't see how it wouldn't work with that said it could be that after a certain point it doesn't handle traffic well. I also haven't read up on it that much so I don't know what the "speed" is going to be either which could impact mrv if you had a ton of internal traffic. I would assume people would prefer to keep it seperate so that watching mrv is not impacted by someone watching something that is beind downloaded.


----------



## Brennok (Dec 23, 2005)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Personally I think that you'll be glad you did at some point... you may want another internet-connected device at that same location. Wireless is great but it's really no substitute for good, old-fashioned copper.


I definitely agree here. Also I would run more runs then you think you might need. They can come in handy.

My house wasn't wired and I now have around 16 drops with at least one in each room with some spots having 2-4. I had my friend run drops anywhere I thought I might use one and multiple drops in spots I knew I would need at least 2.


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

jaguar325 said:


> With the coming of MRV and DECA, is it dumb to be putting in new Ethernet runs?


Dumb? It's the highest quality and most cost effective (not counting your own labor) home network that you can install. Home network, heck office buildings too.

Wireless G won't support MRV and wireless N is describled as YMMV.

DECA is a simple way to network a few DVRs. It's not designed to handle PCs, printers, TVs, DVD players, smart fridges, etc. It's a shared wire baseband solution so DVRs will have to run at half duplex with collision detection (CD). This essentially halves the bandwidth and then you get the knee in the performance curve where things go to hell in a hand basket at about 50 percent bandwidth utilization, drops like a rock because of collisions and retransmissions. DECA looks like a great MRV solution for Harry and Marge down the street that have never heard of ethernet.

The twisted pair wire that home runs to a switch is the best way today to put ethernet in the home/office assuming you have the talent and tools (and you don't have to tear open too many walls). The worst thing that happens is if the switch is inadaquate, you upgrade it. Newer 10/100/1000 switches at consumer prices are now available that have a good chance of handling most anything a 100baseT interface can do.

Last thought, use cat6 for all new anything. Cat5e is right a the edge of the specification for support of 1000baseT which has become usual on newer quality PC's and will be everywhere in a few years. Just a couple extra bucks per run if shopping monoprice.com, for instance.

Mike


----------



## webby_s (Jan 11, 2008)

So this hits home for me at this moment in my life.

I moved to a bigger/better home and I have/will be running MULTIPLE RG6, Cat and whatever I can to get it up-to-date/future proofed. After reading some post here I may change my mind and run Cat6 or even Cat6a (gotta love monoprice.com) just for the fact of future proofing. I have a 100ft run of Cat5e laying around and I was just thinking of cutting that apart and using it for the runs but I may just go with the Cat6/6a instead.

Thoughts? I have fished all my RG6 runs myself (a few cuts and bruises) and I made sure I could run more! After seeing solidsignal has RG11 I was actually thinking of ordering some of that and running it... I know crazy. Just wanting to future proof here but I know it will be easy to run new if need be.


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

webby_s said:


> After seeing solidsignal has RG11 I was actually thinking of ordering some of that and running it... I know crazy. Just wanting to future proof here but I know it will be easy to run new if need be.


I'd say go with RG11 only if you need runs over the 150 foot limit. Has thicker center conductor so moves DC voltage signals further with less loss. But it will be harder to work with requiring its own connectors and tools and has wider turning radius requirements. If you don't need the distance stick with RG6. Won't make your TV picture any better.


----------



## jaguar325 (Jan 2, 2006)

Given the comments so far, I am inclined to proceed with installing the new Ethernet runs. The level of effort is probably "medium" (better part of a Saturday) based on a similar experience a couple years ago running more RG6. I have never attempted to put plug-ends on Ethernet cable so am not sure what fun awaits me there.

I am going to order the cable today so I have it by the weekend. There is a lot of confusing information on the internet about it. I have already decided that the possibility of running through plenums is low so I only need PVC grad cable but now I am trying to determine whether Cat5e is good enough or to pay a little extra for Cat6 or Cat6a. As a reference point for stuff I may want to use in the future, I looked at a Gefen box for doing HDMI (1080p) over Ethernet and it requires 225MHz capacity. They are recommending Cat6a but say Cat5e and Cat6 will work but with shorter distances. Anybody have an opinion about the differences and benefits of one over the other? I am probably going to get Cat 6 just because the price difference is not that great but the jump to 6a is big.

Thanks,

Big K


----------



## joed32 (Jul 27, 2006)

My longest run is 50' with Cat-5 and it's working just fine with MRV and VOD. I have 4 DVRs networked and used a mix of Cat-5 and Cat-6 and don't see any difference. If I were starting over I would go with Cat-6. Why not?


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

Buy the CAT6 cable! It doesn't cost much more, but you'd hate to do all the work to put it in the wall and then have to rip it out and replace it in a couple of years.

When I wired my house in 1997, people thought I was crazy thinking that I might need more than 10Mb/s networking *at home*. 100Mb equipment was "expensive" and "for big servers" and "no one needs 100Mb at home!"

Today, I have Gig ethernet in several locations and move huge files around the network all the time. Believe me, when you're moving 10GB files around, the time difference between 100Mb and Gb is BIG.

The moral of this is that your needs and expectations will grow QUICKLY; faster than you'd believe. You'll likely be using that ethernet cable every single day for a long time, so it only makes sense to look ahead. Cat5e is already maxed out today, while CAT6 may give you 10-15 years before it's in the same position. What's $100 or less over 10 years of daily use?


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

jaguar325 said:


> Anybody have an opinion about the differences and benefits of one over the other? I am probably going to get Cat 6 just because the price difference is not that great but the jump to 6a is big.


Considering the price premium you pay for Cat 6a, I don't think I would consider it now for the home unless someone else was picking up the bill. 

Mike


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Instead of putting male RJ-45 connectors on the end of the Cat 5 / 6 cable, get jacks that 'punch down' and 3, 6 or x foot patch cords from Monoprice. The jacks and single or double enclosures / wall plates are a few dollars, but after getting the cable pulled, it's worth it.

The jacks are typically labeled for the proper color code pair.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

I fail to see the complication of setting up a wireless access point. It took me all of 5 to 10 minutes to go to BestBuy and buy 2 linksys routers and flash one of them to WRT. I now have 4 or 5 ports in my entertainment center.

That sounds a lot easier then snaking cable.


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

dennisj00 said:


> Instead of putting male RJ-45 connectors on the end of the Cat 5 / 6 cable, get jacks that 'punch down' and 3, 6 or x foot patch cords from Monoprice. The jacks and single or double enclosures / wall plates are a few dollars, but after getting the cable pulled, it's worth it.
> 
> The jacks are typically labeled for the proper color code pair.


This is by far the best way to do it if you are going to hardwire your house. Any way that you do it make sure you get your wires in the right position. Don't rush this part.


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> I fail to see the complication of setting up a wireless access point. It took me all of 5 to 10 minutes to go to BestBuy and buy 2 linksys routers and flash one of them to WRT. I now have 4 or 5 ports in my entertainment center.
> 
> That sounds a lot easier then snaking cable.


It is easier than snaking cable. What the heck, give it a try. But as has been said here a number of times, YMMV.

All networks are not created equal. What works for one application may not work for another.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

jaguar325 said:


> ...I am trying to determine whether Cat5e is good enough or to pay a little extra for Cat6 or Cat6a...Anybody have an opinion about the differences and benefits of one over the other? I am probably going to get Cat 6 just because the price difference is not that great but the jump to 6a is big...


The industry standard is Cat6e. You will need at least Cat6 to move data at gigabit speeds, unless you are talking pretty short distances. Cat5e could be OK for short jumpers, but I would not use it.

I think the idea is to be able to stream video, which is why you need gigabit speed. Forget that some switches or NICs in your setup may only be 10/100 and will throttle everything down to that speed, because the switches and NICs can be (and probably eventually will be) easily replaced.

Gigabit speed is the now and near future, and you don't want to be using the Cat5 you install now as a pull-string to replace it with something else in the distant future. IOW, future-proof yourself with Cat6e.

If you ever get to the point where you want to move 1080p60 HD video over ethernet in real time, it will probably still work over room-to-room distances, but thats 3 Gb speed, so you could insure that you will have that capability with Cat6a, but you will really pay a premium for it. I think 6e is the safe bet.

Be forwarned, installing the connectors is a bear if you have not done this before. Cat5 is a walk in the park, but Cat6 connectors have a steep learning curve, and the crimp tools are like $150 and up. I had done hundreds of Cat5 connectors, but the first 10 Cat6 connectors I did each took about 45 minutes, and I was lucky if half of them worked. I have done about a hundred by now, and it still takes about 5 minutes to do them. Be sure to follow T-368B (?) wiring codes.



Stuart Sweet said:


> ...Wireless is great but it's really no substitute for good, old-fashioned copper.


True dat. I don't know of a wireless protocol for consumer networks that can stream at gigabit speeds. 802.11g needs to compress stereo audio just to pipe it over my Airport Express. .11n is becoming available, but I'm not sure it can stream HD video.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

TomCat said:


> The industry standard is Cat6e.


They have already revised it?:eek2:


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

matt1124 said:


> They have already revised it?:eek2:


I dont know about industry standard, but i've seen cat6e floating around.

Frankly, I cant tell the difference between cat6e and cat6. It's probably how far its been swept to or something.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

CJTE said:


> I dont know about industry standard, but i've seen cat6e floating around.
> 
> Frankly, I cant tell the difference between cat6e and cat6. It's probably how far its been swept to or something.


I looked around a little bit. I found a 6a that is swept higher. It seems like as soon as you buy a spool a new revision comes out...


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

BattleZone said:


> When I wired my house in 1997, people thought I was crazy thinking that I might need more than 10Mb/s networking *at home*. 100Mb equipment was "expensive" and "for big servers" and "no one needs 100Mb at home!"


Was it made of coax with the BNC connectors haha


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

matt1124 said:


> I looked around a little bit. I found a 6a that is swept higher. It seems like as soon as you buy a spool a new revision comes out...


Cat6e definitely exists. I've got a box of it from Commscope.


----------



## jaguar325 (Jan 2, 2006)

Guys, I went ahead and ordered some Cat 6 cable yesterday, found a version of it from Cables to Go with a higher rated speed than "standard" Cat 6 - it's rated for 500MHz vs. their standard stuff at 355MHz. It wasn't much more money than the base Cat 6 but a lot cheaper than Cat 6a.

For dennisj00: would you mind telling me specifically what punch-down connectors you are advising? 

For TomCat: I ordered some plug ends that are supposed to be better for Cat 6 and a crimper recommended by their guy in Tech Support. After reading some reviews on their web site, I have to say that I've got some concerns about the process of installing plugs for the first time. I've done plenty of electrical and low-voltage work around my house but never done LAN cables. Can you point to any web sites that you think would be helpful in doing this right? I'm not so much worried about a slow tedious process as I am making cables that don't work.

Thanks,

Big K


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

This is what I ordered when I wired my home with Cat 6.

http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10234&cs_id=1023401&p_id=2261&seq=1&format=2
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10513&cs_id=1051305&p_id=1026&seq=1&format=2
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10513&cs_id=1051303&p_id=1044&seq=1&format=2
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10509&cs_id=1050901&p_id=3348&seq=1&format=2

The keystone jacks had the color coding on the sides of them telling you which wire went where and they are very easy to install. I think this is what he was talking about when he said Punch Down connectors.

The normal cable ends are a bit more difficult to wire up yourself, but not impossible. You just have to take your time, make sure you get each wire in the correct hole on the little insert thing, and then push it into the housing. Getting the little insert to go all the way into the housing is the biggest trouble I have. The wires tend to want to just push past it. I usually end up taking a small screwdriver or something like that to help push the insert in, then I take the screwdriver out and use the crimp tool once it is in place correctly.


----------



## DLLindsay (Apr 3, 2008)

Search the 'net for instructions to terminate the cable. I can't post a website yet.

Dennis


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

BattleZone said:


> Today, I have Gig ethernet in several locations and move huge files around the network all the time. Believe me, when you're moving 10GB files around, the time difference between 100Mb and Gb is BIG.


The OP has a unique requirement here that has nothing to do with computer networking.

BTW, CAT5 is usually just fine for Gigabit Ethernet in a residential scenario. The frequency response requirements are the same (125MHz).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Note that Gefen now offers the same wall plate extenders that everyone else does at a much better price than their original boxes.


----------



## hitokage (Jan 19, 2010)

EDIT - I took too long to write this (doing other things at the same time), but I did cover some things that haven't been mentioned yet.



2dogz said:


> Last thought, use cat6 for all new anything. Cat5e is right a the edge of the specification for support of 1000baseT which has become usual on newer quality PC's and will be everywhere in a few years.


Gigabit ethernet was designed to work on CAT5, however there can be issues depending on the quality of the cable, and this is why CAT5e was developed - see here for details on CAT5 and here for specifics on gigabit ethernet. Installing CAT6 and its derivatives doesn't actually gain much (except if used for things outside of computer networking) - as gigabit will work perfectly well on CAT5e (up to the full distance of 328' between devices), and if you want to really future proof you'll need CAT7 (aka ISO/IEC 11801 Class F) or CAT7a (aka ISO/IEC 11801 Class F Amendment 1). To use 10Gb and go the full 328' between devices requires CAT6a, however it can be used for short distances on CAT6 (180') and even CAT5e (148'). So, depending on the size of your house and how you wire it, CAT5e is still pretty future-proof (until 40GbE and/or 100GbE becomes a standard).

Also, while there are places selling supposed CAT6e, it appears that it isn't an official standard, much like CAT5e+.

I wired the house with CAT5e+, which was supposedly better then CAT5e, but anyway I did this about five years ago and at that time the cost difference to CAT6 and above was a lot more.


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

hitokage said:


> To use 10Gb and go the full 328' between devices requires CAT6a, however it can be used for short distances on CAT6 (180') and even CAT5e (148'). So, depending on the size of your house and how you wire it, CAT5e is still pretty future-proof (until 40GbE and/or 100GbE becomes a standard).


hitokage: good job taking the time to look up the distances of various grade cable. 180 feet looks good to me as 10GbaseT is about as far into the event horizon as I can see.

Something is bothering me about some earlier posts on this thread. Folks keep refering to their buying a crimp tool which I assume is for 8P8C connectors (aka RJ-45). What do they need this for? to make patch cables? Last time I touched one of these was like 15-20 years ago. Folks, we buy patch cables, machine made, tested, and dirt cheap. The only special tools you should need are a stripper and a 110 punch down tool to install twisted pair ethernet. You don't put these connectors on the bulk cable. The install go like this:

PC/DVR/whatever ->
patch cable ->
keystone jack (110) ->
bulk cable run ->
patch panel or keystone jack (110) ->
patch cable ->
ethernet switch/router/whatever

The two patch cable interconnects are part of the spec and assumed for every run.

Mike

Edit: An additional thought. For the bulk cable run where both end use 110 jacks, you want solid copper conductor cable for a solid physical connection. For making patch cables where you're installing 8P8C/RJ-45 connectors, you want standed conductors in the cable so when you crimp the connector's little teeth bite into the wire and nest into the strands of wire.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

Leviton QuickPort









An example of not doing it quite right. You want to have the jacket right up against the back of the connector, and you only untwist the wire pairs until just before they reach the connection points, so that you have minimal untwisted wires. This has gotten a lot more important as network speeds have increased.

Note that the QuickPort has color codes to make it easy to figure out which wires go where. There is a color code for T568A and T568B. Technically, you can use either standard as long as you use the same standard on both ends of the cable, but T568B is the defacto standard. If you use T568A on one end and T568B on the other end, you've made a crossover cable.

















It's okay to have an inch or two of wire hanging out past the connection point, as your punchdown tool will cut off the excess. You want to use the side of the tool that has the chisel-style cutter, which will chop the excess wire off flush. The jacket is half an inch from the end of the connector here, which is way too far. The goal is for the jacket to be virtually flush with the connector.









Again, an example of too much loose, untwisted wire, but otherwise the right idea.









Ahh... this one is done right! The jacket is right at the end of the connector, and the wire pairs are left twisted until the last possible milimeter. This is your goal.









If you're hardcore, or just have a bunch of jacks to make, this tool is the bomb. It crimps and cuts all 8 wires at once. Warning: it only works with Leviton-brand jacks, and there are lots of cheapie knock-offs out there.


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

BattleZone:

Some really good pictures of a really lousy connection.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

I try to use pics whenever I can. I can type all day and not "say" things as clearly as a couple of pics can.

Google Images is my friend.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

CJTE said:


> I dont know about industry standard, but i've seen cat6e floating around.
> 
> Frankly, I cant tell the difference between cat6e and cat6. It's probably how far its been swept to or something.


OK, let me clarify: when I say "industry standard", I am talking about the broadcast and content delivery industry, not the computer industry in general. About the only reason to need GigE speed at home is to pipe uncompressed HD video around the house, or download on demand and/or stream TV shows from a provider through the "last mile" being your home LAN, but since those are the kinds of things that folks are leaning towards, I think it makes sense to lean toward this standard. Cat 5 will probably work today. In 5-10-years, you might be happy that you went with Cat6e, and probably not unhappy that you didn't spend 4-5 times as much on 6a.

I think 6e (the "e" meaning "enhanced") is probably capable of faster speeds not only because it is swept to a higher frequency (which only proofs it as having that capability), but is built to a higher standard so that it _can_ be swept to a higher frequency, which consequently gives more speed headroom versus 5e. It is not significantly more expensive than 6, but 6a is, and might be overkill.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

BattleZone said:


> [...
> Ahh... this one is done right!...


Good info, 'Zone, but jacks implies having to have connectors to go into them. Typically, jacks are not the issue (unless wiring directly inside the wall) as all equipment already has jacks.

The issue is plugs, as it takes plugs to make the wires that connect the devices or wall plates that contain the jacks. You can wire your house with just jacks in wall plates (not a bad idea if you can pull it off) and then use pre-made jumpers, but that is the only way to avoid installing connectors, which you will need to connect equipment that is further away than the same side of the room, assuming no in-wall path.

I will look at work and see if I can get a part number for the connectors and tool to post. As hard as these were to use, an extensive internet search (with the hopes of finding something better or simpler) never panned out for me, so I capitulated and am using what appears to be a reliable (though difficult to use) system.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

The whole goal is indeed to install JACKS and then be able to use cheap pre-made jumpers.



















BUT... if you *do* want to make your own jumpers, the best way is to use EZ-RJ45 equipment. It isn't cheap, but it is a heck of a lot easier than standard RJ45. By simply leaving the front of the connector open and designing the tool to chop off the excess wire, it makes installing the connectors on the wire about a hundred times easier. I've installed many standard RJ45 connectors, and it's always a pain. The EZ-RJ45 reduces that pain considerably.

Yes, the tool is expensive and even the "ice cube" connectors cost more, but you cut your time by at least half, and your chance of success goes WAY up compared to standard RJ45 unless you take a LOT of time on each connector. I can't remember a single EZ-RJ45 connection failing, but even taking great care, about 1 in 20 of my standard RJ45 connections won't work. You can even get strain reliefs that also protect the latch, making your cables look and work totally "professional."


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

hitokage said:


> ... Installing CAT6 and its derivatives doesn't actually gain much (except if used for things outside of computer networking) - as gigabit will work perfectly well on CAT5e (up to the full distance of 328' between devices),...
> 
> ...I wired the house with CAT5e+, which was supposedly better then CAT5e, but anyway I did this about five years ago and at that time the cost difference to CAT6 and above was a lot more.


Cat5e+ was fine, and the best choice at the time. But that was then and this is now. Today, 6e is the practical and economic choice, while 6a is the expensive lunatic-fringe choice that 6 was 5 years ago. And Cat5 is serviceable for systems in place, but obsolete as a choice for new installs.

While cat5e+ (and others) is rated at 100 meters for GiGe, real world performance is usually not such, just like Firewire is supposed to be 400 mb and only approaches 360 in the real world. We looked at lengths of Cat6 installed professionally by outside experts that were about 230 feet long using an analyzer (Validator) and never were they capable of anything beyond about 930-960 mbps, which is short of the GiG-E standard, but not by much.

The "specs" imply a perfect system, including perfect connectorization, no crosstalk, no bends in the cable, identical wire lengths (due to twist, one wire can surprisingly measure 30 ft shorter than another inside the same twist), twist issues themselves, and other things that are not always perfect in the real world. And 100 m in a straight line implies a path length of about 105-110 m through twisted pairs. So for some breathing room and insurance, I still recommend 6e for its low cost and being only slightly more costly than 5e or 6. That way, if you do have problems in the future, you can instantly rule out the pipe as being too small.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

I completely agree with everything in the above post.


----------



## BobZ (Feb 20, 2007)

TomCat said:


> OK, let me clarify: when I say "industry standard", I am talking about the broadcast and content delivery industry, not the computer industry in general. About the only reason to need GigE speed at home is to pipe uncompressed HD video around the house, or download on demand and/or stream TV shows from a provider through the "last mile" being your home LAN, but since those are the kinds of things that folks are leaning towards, I think it makes sense to lean toward this standard. Cat 5 will probably work today. In 5-10-years, you might be happy that you went with Cat6e, and probably not unhappy that you didn't spend 4-5 times as much on 6a.
> 
> I think 6e (the "e" meaning "enhanced") is probably capable of faster speeds not only because it is swept to a higher frequency (which only proofs it as having that capability), but is built to a higher standard so that it _can_ be swept to a higher frequency, which consequently gives more speed headroom versus 5e. It is not significantly more expensive than 6, but 6a is, and might be overkill.


I need to chime in here to clarify some things as structured cabling is what I do for a living.

The Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) created structured cabling categories back in the early 1980's. Cat 5 has a bandwidth of 100 MHz. So does Cat 5e. Cat 5e (Enhanced Category 5) was specifically developed to guarantee 1GBE over 100 meters. Category 5 can be tested to determine if it will support 1GBE but there are no guarantees. The major reason that makes Cat 5e different from Cat 5 is that it has much lower Return Loss, and can easily support 1GBE.

The Cat 6 cabling standard was released back in 2002. It has a bandwidth of 200 MHz. It was not developed specifically to support a particular application like Cat 5e was. In fact, there is no real benefit with Cat 6 other than it is possible that it may support 10GBE to up to maybe 55 meters, but there are no guarantees.

There is no Cat 6e standard. It carries a higher price than Cat 6 but does not provide any real benefit. Sweeping to a higher frequency does not mean that the cable neccessarily has a better performance. It still won't run the application intended for the specific Category of cabling any farther, and faster, or any better than a standards compliant cable. I would absolutely not recommend installing what manufactureres call Category 6e cable.

The Cat 6A (Augmented Category 6) standard was released by TIA in June of 2002. It has a bandwidth of 500 MHz. It was specifically developed to support 10GBE over 100 meters. Is it overkill for the average residence? Absolutely in my opinion, however it is regularly being specified and installed in high end residential resort facilities worldwide.


----------



## BobZ (Feb 20, 2007)

TomCat said:


> Cat5e+ was fine, and the best choice at the time. But that was then and this is now. Today, 6e is the practical and economic choice, while 6a is the expensive lunatic-fringe choice that 6 was 5 years ago. And Cat5 is serviceable for systems in place, but obsolete as a choice for new installs.
> 
> While cat5e+ (and others) is rated at 100 meters for GiGe, real world performance is usually not such, just like Firewire is supposed to be 400 mb and only approaches 360 in the real world. We looked at lengths of Cat6 installed professionally by outside experts that were about 230 feet long using an analyzer (Validator) and never were they capable of anything beyond about 930-960 mbps, which is short of the GiG-E standard, but not by much.
> 
> The "specs" imply a perfect system, including perfect connectorization, no crosstalk, no bends in the cable, identical wire lengths (due to twist, one wire can surprisingly measure 30 ft shorter than another inside the same twist), twist issues themselves, and other things that are not always perfect in the real world. And 100 m in a straight line implies a path length of about 105-110 m through twisted pairs. So for some breathing room and insurance, I still recommend 6e for its low cost and being only slightly more costly than 5e or 6. That way, if you do have problems in the future, you can instantly rule out the pipe as being too small.


The rules for Ethernet are established by IEEE 802.3. This application standard has performance limits for the channel (max 100 meters) that are actually less stringent than what the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) performance limits are. ANSI/TIA is the association that establishes the Category performance requirements for cable and connectors. Testing an insalled cabling run to TIA limits ensures that any application intended for the cabling will be supported to the distances specified.

There are 1000's of facilities worldwide where Cat 5e cabling is running 1 Gigabit Ethernet flawlessly. Most people are under the wrong impression that Cat 6 is needed to support Gigabit Ethernet to 100 meters. This is truely a myth. All of the most notible structured cabling manufacturers have application assurance warranties (20 to 25 years being the most popular) with their cabling systems. In fact Cat 5e is one of the most robust systems if the components are manufactured by a reputable company. Unfortunetely these days there are offshore companies making counterfit components that are not compliant. You get what you pay for.

The cabling standards also specify a parameter called delay skew. This paramenter ensures that the signal traveling down all four pairs of a cable arrives at the opposite end within a certain timeframe of each other. This is controlled by the manufacturing process of the cable and is one of the parameters that can be accurately measured with a TIA compliant cable scanner.

The Cross-talk is controlled mostly by the twists in the pairs. Keeping the twist as close to the termination point as possible also has a major influence on NEXT. This however is very easily accomplished because of new technology in termination tooling that is available. An experieced installer also has no issues with maintaining the untwist. As long as the twist is kept to within .250" of the insulation displacement contact, for either Cat 5, Cat 5e, Cat 6 or Cat 6A there will be no problems with Near End Cross-talk (NEXT).

Bends in the cable can be tolorated as long as the minimum bend radius of 4 times the diameter of the cable is maintained. That's about 1" for a Cat 5e or Cat 6 cable. Not that difficult to easily achieve.

This stuff does not have to hanled with kid gloves to perform as advertised.


----------



## BobZ (Feb 20, 2007)

BattleZone said:


> The whole goal is indeed to install JACKS and then be able to use cheap pre-made jumpers.
> 
> /QUOTE]
> 
> You might want to _*not*_ consider using "cheap" pre-made jumpers. The performance of the patch cords is as important if not more important than the cable run it is attached to. The weakest component in the channel degrades the overall performance. "Cheap" pre-made jumpers have a huge impact on the performance of the application.


----------



## drpjr (Nov 23, 2007)

BattleZone said:


> The whole goal is indeed to install JACKS and then be able to use cheap pre-made jumpers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


BattleZone, Have you seen the 2-piece connectors? They work on the same principle as the EZ-RJ45 connectors but are less expensive and can be installed with normal tools. They have a beveled "keeper" bar with holes in it. You insert the wires through the bar then blunt cut the wire just like the EZ's then insert it into the connector which is tapered to match the bevel. Crimp and go. For me the best part is not having to thread all the wires into a connecter at the same time. I can spread the wires out and thread each individually without disturbing the others. Very easy and what I would call quick. I've only had one "failure" in about 50 tries and that was a mistake crossover cable. I'm a retired fat fingered electrician and I love them.:lol:


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

BobZ said:


> You might want to _*not*_ consider using "cheap" pre-made jumpers. The performance of the patch cords is as important if not more important than the cable run it is attached to. The weakest component in the channel degrades the overall performance. "Cheap" pre-made jumpers have a huge impact on the performance of the application.


BobZ: nice contribution to the discussion.

Maybe cheap is the wrong word to use. Monoprice.com has a 7' cat6 550MHz (don't know what 550 MHZ means) patch cord quantity 1 for $1.66, and 50+ for $1.24. Brought a bunch of these and quality seems up to snuff, work fine. In comparison to a gal of milk, a gal of gas, directv monthly bill, or fixing a check engine light on the car, these are cheap, eh, eh, I mean inexpensive. Not worth the effort of making them yourself, IMHO.


----------



## jaguar325 (Jan 2, 2006)

You guys are great! My confidence level with this coming weekend's cable job has gone way up with all the great advice. 

BTW: I hear nothing but great things about Monoprice on this site and was looking forward to using them for this job... funny thing is, with my searches on their site, I was not finding the Cat6 bulk cable (just pre-made patch cables) so I bought it elsewhere. I do a LOT of things on-line and consider myself reasonable proficient at finding stuff so it's surprising I missed the cable/plugs/crimpers that you provided links for. Maybe I need to spend more time on their site and figure out their navigation. Oh well, not a big deal, the stuff will be here tomorrow and with your help, I feel ready.

-Big K


----------



## hitokage (Jan 19, 2010)

drpjr said:


> BattleZone, Have you seen the 2-piece connectors? They work on the same principle as the EZ-RJ45 connectors but are less expensive and can be installed with normal tools. They have a beveled "keeper" bar with holes in it. You insert the wires through the bar then blunt cut the wire just like the EZ's then insert it into the connector which is tapered to match the bevel. Crimp and go. For me the best part is not having to thread all the wires into a connecter at the same time. I can spread the wires out and thread each individually without disturbing the others. Very easy and what I would call quick. I've only had one "failure" in about 50 tries and that was a mistake crossover cable. I'm a retired fat fingered electrician and I love them.:lol:


Do you know who still carries those? The last time I got some was a few years ago from Black Box, and now that I want to replenish my supply they don't seem to have them any more - just the EZ ones.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

hitokage said:


> Do you know who still carries those? The last time I got some was a few years ago from Black Box, and now that I want to replenish my supply they don't seem to have them any more - just the EZ ones.


The second link in my post above (post #26).


----------



## drpjr (Nov 23, 2007)

Beerstalker said:


> The second link in my post above (post #26).


That's the ticket! They are wonderful. Here is the install link showing the "keeper" bar. http://www.monoprice.com/manual/How to - crimp RJ45 w inserts.pdf Fry's also has them locally.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

My only problem with them is the insert doesn't like to go in all the way. Of course I haven't been pushing the jacket into the connector like they do in the instructions, maybe that will help. (Those instructions weren't there before, I just taught myself how to make them looking at my existing patch cables).


----------



## drpjr (Nov 23, 2007)

That was one problem I didn't have.:lol: A friend had the the EZ's and the tool. I had nothing but trouble trying to thread the wires with those. It was like working in a tiny tunnel. I found the 2-piece at Fry's by accident and will never go back.


----------



## jaguar325 (Jan 2, 2006)

Guys, I just started my work on the Cat 6 installation and hit a snag. One of the locations where I have a DVR that I want to share via MRV is way off at one end of the basement against an outside wall. Tunneling through my bedroom's hardwood floor above or coming in through the outside is not an option. I tried getting to it through the openings of my basement can lights but there is a heating duct in the way plus about 5 joists. The low voltage wire going to that spot is within reach but is tacked down, I tried pulling each one to see if any were loose enough to serve as a fish - no way.

An idea came to me -- maybe a dumb one but I will ask; the house was wired in 1995 and I have many old wires (no longer in use) going to this spot. I was wondering, from the list below, whether any of them would be good candidates for "re-purposing" for Ethernet. My thought is, if the wire is OK to carry Ethernet, maybe I could solder or splice Cat 6 ends on it... being careful to keep the wires matched to the appropriate Cat 6 strands on both ends. Here's what I have to choose from that is no longer in use:


Two 22-gauge, shielded, stranded wire, once used for distributing analog line-level audio (4 wires each, total of 8)
One Cat3 phone line, solid, shielded (total of 8 strands)
Two 16-gauge, stranded, unshielded, 4-wire speaker cables (total of 8 strands)

[all wires run a total of about 15-20 feet max]

I am thinking the 1st option might be the closest thing to Cat 6 and the shielding might help. If this would work, it would solve a big problem for me!

Thanks,

-Big K


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

None of those is a good ethernet option, especially cat6 rated. Of the three I would probably opt for the cat 3 phone line. At least it has twisted pairs.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

BobZ said:


> I need to chime in here to clarify some things as structured cabling is what I do for a living...


That may qualiy you as an expert regarding ethernet cable. It even may (or may not) qualify you as an expert in application of same. And I greatly respect that.

But interestingly, your expert recommendation has been ignored by probably every single broadcast and content facility aware of what the potential future limitations of NOT using Cat6 or Cat6e can be, as the _de facto_ "standard" virtually all of them conform to is to use either Cat6 or Cat6e without exception, other than for easily-replaced panel jumpers. TCP/IP has all but replaced coax for professional video applications, meaning ethernet is the air they breathe, is where their infrastructure lies, and what it is ultimately dependent upon.

And their logic in doing so is the same logic I am standing behind, which is that the slightly-increased cost of Cat6 or Cat6e over Cat5 or Cat5e is cheap insurance against not having a crystal ball and not knowing what the future will bring. If you install ethernet cabling in a facility, it may have to be sericeable for decades. 5-15 years down the road you may have to replace Cat5 at very considerable expense, while Cat6e may extend that useful life to twice that long.

And I think that same logic applies to anyone post-wiring or pre-wiring a residence, also. As a matter of fact, I can think of no earthly reason to not follow that logic, regardless of what Cat5 is capable of today.


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

Don't want to drill into hardwood floor. Maybe loosen the quarter round and baseboard if necessary along the edge of room and drill under it. Easy repair later if necessary. 

Maybe this is a ranch style house (with bedroom over top the basement). Sounds like basement is finished. You might route cable up into the attic from utility room and drop down inside of a closet, maybe. Just tossing out ideas. Hard to say without more information.

I agree with Carl, never mix wire types. Impedence mismatches, resistence, and all kind of electrical bogeymen there.

Mike


----------



## jaguar325 (Jan 2, 2006)

Unfortunately, it's a situation where everything in the vicinity in question was finished when the house was built. If mixing wire types is asking for problems, I would probably opt for cutting hand-sized holes between each joist from the place I have access and the "offending location". I am reasonably proficient at drywall repair and have a little experience with matching knock-down ceiling texture so maybe the best thing to do is to just suck it up and drill/cut the 4-5 holes it's gonna take to get over to the A/V stack. 

I am still curious though - if I used one of the existing wires and was willing to accept that this connection would never match N speeds, would it at least work? What I have learned so far is that 50-100 mbs speed inside the house seems to get the job done.

Thanks,

-Big K


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

4 or 5 holes in a textured ceiling, ouch. If you go that route think about a couple of those plastic access panels and a tub of pull cord (any electrical supply) for future access and pulls (TVs and BluRay players). A piece of PVC pipe also works if there is room, but, of course, you can't go cutting big holes in structural framing. Working with drywall doesn't bother me either, it the drying part, like watching grass grow.

As for that cat 3 cable, used it for original twisted pair 10baseT networking, and even pre standard 10 Mbps ethernet back in the 90s. But have no idea what you can push through it. I don't think I would even try. Even to splice it correctly you would need a particular type of parallel 110 block (never tried it) or jerryrig two keystone jacks and a patch cord.

Good luck


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

If the installer didn't staple the Hell out of any one of the cables, I'd use it to pull through some Ethernet cable.


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

jaguar325 said:


> An idea came to me -- maybe a dumb one but I will ask; the house was wired in 1995 and I have many old wires (no longer in use) going to this spot. I was wondering, from the list below, whether any of them would be good candidates for "re-purposing" for Ethernet. My thought is, if the wire is OK to carry Ethernet, maybe I could solder or splice Cat 6 ends on it... being careful to keep the wires matched to the appropriate Cat 6 strands on both ends. Here's what I have to choose from that is no longer in use:
> 
> 
> Two 22-gauge, shielded, stranded wire, once used for distributing analog line-level audio (4 wires each, total of 8)
> ...





carl6 said:


> None of those is a good ethernet option, especially cat6 rated. Of the three I would probably opt for the cat 3 phone line. At least it has twisted pairs.





harsh said:


> If the installer didn't staple the Hell out of any one of the cables, I'd use it to pull through some Ethernet cable.


I'd go with Carl6's recommendation first, but with a hesitation.

Where does the phone line (Cat3) go? After it leaves the jack?
If you're house uses a looped phone system (which, to my understanding, is rather common, but I may be wrong), That Cat3 could very well come in from another room, connect to that jack, and then continue on to yet another room.
If that's the case, you would have to identify what room it comes FROM, as well as what room it goes TO.
Disconnecting that jack from the rest of the loop won't cause a problem for the rest of the jacks, but then you'll have an empty wall plate, depending on the setup of your house.

If it's a typical looped system, the loop will have 2 end points from the demarc (where the phone service comes in) that go through the house each in the opposite direction.

So, if you were to replace this phone jack with a cat5 punch, you would also have to replace either one of the opposing jacks (whichever one you replaced would be the network source).

On the other hand, if it's a centralized system (where there are individual lines run to each phone jack, and they all connect in something like a smart panel) which could be the case depending on how high-end the home is, then you would want to trace which line is the one you intend to make into your make-shift network cable back to the central location, and change the jack at the room and at the central location.

If this sounds too complicated, I would recommend looking into harsh's suggestion of using one of the current lines as a pull. I'd go with the thickest gauge cable for that job, less likely to snap as you pull.


----------



## hitokage (Jan 19, 2010)

Beerstalker said:


> The second link in my post above (post #26).


Thanks - I didn't look at the links before. The ones I had the keeper-bar was a small bit of flat black plastic, that let me keep the twist longer, but whatever works. I found some pictures of the ones I had - Black Box still lists them in the UK, Australia, and Japan, but not here .

When I used these, I was able to keep them twisted longer then they show, and the jacket went further in.









This picture the left portion doesn't show the keeper-bar.









EDIT (submitted to soon) -


TomCat said:


> And their logic in doing so is the same logic I am standing behind, which is that the slightly-increased cost of Cat6 or Cat6e over Cat5 or Cat5e is cheap insurance against not having a crystal ball and not knowing what the future will bring. If you install ethernet cabling in a facility, it may have to be sericeable for decades. 5-15 years down the road you may have to replace Cat5 at very considerable expense, while Cat6e may extend that useful life to twice that long.
> 
> And I think that same logic applies to anyone post-wiring or pre-wiring a residence, also. As a matter of fact, I can think of no earthly reason to not follow that logic, regardless of what Cat5 is capable of today.


Even if you installed CAT6 several years ago, it can't be used past 180' or less depending on the crosstalk problems for 10Gb ethernet. Everyone who installed that thought they were future-proofing, and then along came CAT6a and the 10GbE standard. The same type of situation will no doubt happen with CAT6a, CAT7, and CAT7a cabling. Future-proofing for computer based technology is nearly impossible.

Now I do know a little bit about the broadcast industry as my father is also a broadcast engineer. The station's budget, building design, and of course management is going to dictate how equipment and cabling installs/upgrades are handled. Trying to future-proof the cabling means installing CAT7 or CAT7a which I mentioned previously (the standard was finalized over 7 years ago) or fiber. Actually fiber would be the better technology as it is pretty much future-proof (no interference, crosstalk, or bandwidth limitations). Even if you need copper to interface to the equipment, with fiber you can swap out the media converters and network switches, and be done with the upgrade.

In the home it really depends on who does the work, what the home owner wants/expects, and when the cabling is installed what is used. Most people don't want to pay the expense of having wires run if they can't do it themselves - they'll go with wireless. Even the ones that are willing to pay aren't going to give to much consideration into how it will be used in even five years.

For businesses it''ll be like the broadcast industry with budget, building design, and management dictating how equipment and cabling installs/upgrades are handled. Some run just copper, and others run copper and fiber with the fiber being their future proofing. It will also depend on what the business uses their network for exactly as well. Most typical businesses are still using 100Mb ethernet, as the cost to replace network equipment can be expensive depending on the number of workstations. Cabling upgrades in a data center are generally easy to do, but it's the cabling to workstations that can be difficult. Office renovations or expansions are when the workstation side is typically replaced, and at that point it will be based on budget, management, and predictions of future business needs.


----------



## BobZ (Feb 20, 2007)

TomCat said:


> That may qualiy you as an expert regarding ethernet cable. It even may (or may not) qualify you as an expert in application of same. And I greatly respect that.
> 
> But interestingly, your expert recommendation has been ignored by probably every single broadcast and content facility aware of what the potential future limitations of NOT using Cat6 or Cat6e can be, as the _de facto_ "standard" virtually all of them conform to is to use either Cat6 or Cat6e without exception, other than for easily-replaced panel jumpers. TCP/IP has all but replaced coax for professional video applications, meaning ethernet is the air they breathe, is where their infrastructure lies, and what it is ultimately dependent upon.
> 
> ...


TomCat

My intent was not to make specific recommendations as to which cabling solution one should chose except that IMO Cat 6A is overkill. My points were simply to state the facts regarding the structured cabling categories and their performance levels with respect to supportable distances for Ethernet.

Cat 5 is not a recommended choice these days for any type of network cabling.

I want to restate the fact there are no defined performance levels for Cat 6e. If one should want to select a cabling solution that has higher performance levels than Cat 5e, I would suggest either Cat 6 or Cat 6A not something that has no performance baseline.


----------



## 2dogz (Jun 14, 2008)

BobZ said:


> I want to restate the fact there are no defined performance levels for Cat 6e. If one should want to select a cabling solution that has higher performance levels than Cat 5e, I would suggest either Cat 6 or Cat 6A not something that has no performance baseline.


I just bought a box of 1000' cat 6 for $85. I googled cat 6a prices and came up with $250 to $500 plus a box. For most DIYers, we choke on the the cat 6a price. If you have the deep pockets to have a contractor wire your house, the extra 2 or 3 hundred might be incidental compared to the cost of the entire job. I suppose it all relative and depends on how much futureproof you're willing to pay for.

Anyway, here's an evil thought. The speeds are increasing by orders of magnitude so often that a FCC class B licence may not be granted for residential use unless you use "shielded" twisted pair. Now that would take a bite out of the cat's meow.

Mike


----------



## hitokage (Jan 19, 2010)

2dogz said:


> Anyway, here's an evil thought. The speeds are increasing by orders of magnitude so often that a FCC class B licence may not be granted for residential use unless you use "shielded" twisted pair. Now that would take a bite out of the cat's meow.


That's why what is called CAT7 and CAT7a are shielded - they shielded each pair and the whole cable.


----------



## BobZ (Feb 20, 2007)

hitokage said:


> That's why what is called CAT7 and CAT7a are shielded - they shielded each pair and the whole cable.


Many people are not aware that Cat 5e, Cat 6, and Cat 6A also are available in shielded versions. A Cat 6A shielded cabling solution is actually the best option for 10GBE.


----------



## hitokage (Jan 19, 2010)

Yep, they're available in a shielded form if needed for an environment with higher amounts of electromagnetic interference. CAT6a unshielded and shielded are the minimum to get the maximum distance of 10GbE over copper. In a business or broadcast environment if the budget allows that's what should be installed. Unless of course budget isn't an issue, and then I would go for fiber or CAT7/CAT7a with the hope of future proofing past 10GbE - in the case of copper cabling anyway.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Much of this presumes that you would want or need 10Gb Ethernet in your home; seems like an academic exercise. Thanks to switches, we already have a whole lot more bandwidth than we used to.

Double shielding sounds wicked expensive and possibly difficult to handle/terminate. I would wonder if it was time to start looking at fiber at that point.


----------



## barryb (Aug 27, 2007)

I doubled everything when I did my house. No regrets here.

In most rooms there are 2 CAT6e connections, some even have 3 (like my office). This way I can do runs right to my switch without adding in other devices.

Things like connected Bluray players, Xbox and the like need Ethernet connections these days.


----------



## barryb (Aug 27, 2007)

harsh said:


> I would wonder if it was time to start looking at fiber at that point.


Fiber would be great harsh, if everyone happened to have a truck load of fiber-to-Ethernet converters in our hands (for free).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

barryb said:


> Fiber would be great harsh, if everyone happened to have a truck load of fiber-to-Ethernet converters in our hands (for free).


At the point that replacement of existing CAT5 became necessary (as opposed to beneficial), prices would likely drop due to economies of scale. There really isn't all that much to a modern media converter.

For their part, DIRECTV thoughtfully included a fiber tranceiver in the HR21 Pro.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

barryb said:


> Things like connected Bluray players, Xbox and the like need Ethernet connections these days.


10 years ago, people would have looked at you crazy if you told them you needed fast ethernet connectivity for your game console or movie player. 10 years from now, I assure you there will be a LOT more devices that will need connecting. Frankly, there are lots of things that could already be connected that aren't, because the manufacturers of those home appliances just don't think that way, but that will really start to change over the next decade. Already, TVs have Ethernet built in, and lots of other things soon will be too.

"Smart Homes" are going to be a lot more mainstream...


----------



## barryb (Aug 27, 2007)

harsh said:


> At the point that replacement of existing CAT5 became necessary (as opposed to beneficial), prices would likely drop due to economies of scale. There really isn't all that much to a modern media converter.
> 
> For their part, DIRECTV thoughtfully included a fiber tranceiver in the HR21 Pro.


Sorry... I thought we were trying to help the OP in real time. My flux capacitor is out for repair right now.


----------



## jaguar325 (Jan 2, 2006)

Well, I just blew the better part of 2 days getting an LCD and "sound bar" installed in my office. Way-overkill of an install but I like the no-wires look and it's a b***h doing it post construction. Thanks to Chief, there is a new super-slim mount that puts the TV pretty much flat against the wall - with a cool feature called a "kickstand" to pivot the bottom out for wire-hiding. I used their in-wall box with power conditioner and surge protector behind it. Everything looks great but I made zero progress on the Cat 6... looks like a project for this week after work.

To answer one of the questions asked of me, I think the Cat 3 might very well be in a loop system (seem to remember that from when the house was built) so it's probably not an option. Too bad I can't use that 22 ga. line-level shielded stuff, that would have been a great victory over a job I have put off for a long time. I need to decide whether it's worth cutting/patching the ceiling to go those last 6-7 feet (across joists and under two heat ducts). 

Before I get started with this week's fun, can anybody recommend a solution for creating some sort of a home-run "patch panel" in the unfinished part of my basement? My router and cable modem are up in a closet in my kitchen which sits directly above the unfinshed area. I'd like to have all the runs in the house meet down there vs. having to run them up into the closet because it would require drilling bigger holes through the floor which has ceramic tile on top of 1" of concrete (even under the cabinets). The last time I did this, I almost fried my cordless drill. As long as it would not impact network performance, I'd like to connect my router in the kitchen to some sort of box in the basement where all the hard-wired LAN connections meet. I'm not up on networking terminology so not sure if this would be considered a switch or a hub but that's what I am looking to accomplish. I have an old Linksys 4-port 100mb hub that works OK but would prefer something made to be installed in a home's utility area with more ports -- but still be able to use my main wireless router where it is since that's the most central part of the house.

Thanks,

-Big K


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

jaguar325 said:


> To answer one of the questions asked of me, I think the Cat 3 might very well be in a loop system (seem to remember that from when the house was built) so it's probably not an option. Too bad I can't use that 22 ga. line-level shielded stuff, that would have been a great victory over a job I have put off for a long time. I need to decide whether it's worth cutting/patching the ceiling to go those last 6-7 feet (across joists and under two heat ducts).


It doesn't necessarily mean that it's not an option.
If you take the wall plate off and look at the phone jack, you should see a cat3 cable coming from the left, as well as aa cat3 cable coming from the right. The blue pair (for line 1) meet at the jack where they are twisted around the same screw (between 2 different washers), and the screw is screwed down to hold them in place.
You can disconnect both the left & right Cat3 line from the jack. You then need to find the next closest end-point, preferably somewhere easy to install a Cat5 run, or somewhere that has an extra coax line so you could maybe use MoCA.
Now you need to connect these 2 points (the Cat5 you run, or the Cat5 coming off the MoCA, and the Cat3). If you run Cat5, the easiest thing to do would be crimping an RJ45 connector on the Cat5 cable, and punching down the Cat3 onto a Cat5e jack. Then put a blank wall cover up where the phone jack used to be.
If you use MoCA, change the phone jack to a Cat5e jack, then run a cable from the MoCA to the Cat5e jack.



jaguar325 said:


> Before I get started with this week's fun, can anybody recommend a solution for creating some sort of a home-run "patch panel" in the unfinished part of my basement? My router and cable modem are up in a closet in my kitchen which sits directly above the unfinshed area.


Patch Panels can be found pretty cheap if you know where to look.


----------



## hitokage (Jan 19, 2010)

You could run a network cable around the room, underneath the molding. If it's carpeted, there is typically a gap between the bottom of the molding and the floor. If you have a tile, linoleum, wood, or the like, there is usually a gap with them as well, but there is also typically quarter-round installed which would need to be removed first. Once you get around the room, you can fish it up the wall if you need to.

Leviton makes a line of products for structured cabling for home use that's available at Home Depot - see here. I use their wall plates and jacks as I can obtain them locally when needed.



harsh said:


> Much of this presumes that you would want or need 10Gb Ethernet in your home; seems like an academic exercise. Thanks to switches, we already have a whole lot more bandwidth than we used to.


For the typical home, yes. If the stuff was a lot cheaper, I would be playing with it as I could get my hands on it easily - not that I really need it though.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

BobZ said:


> TomCat
> 
> My intent was not to make specific recommendations as to which cabling solution one should chose except that IMO Cat 6A is overkill. My points were simply to state the facts regarding the structured cabling categories and their performance levels with respect to supportable distances for Ethernet.
> 
> ...


In that case, it appears that we are in complete agreement.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

hitokage said:


> If you use the wiring scheme used in these pix, you will definitely have problems with throughput, as they do not comform to standard wiring schemes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My father was an Orthopedic surgeon, so then I guess I know a little bit about broken arms. Makes perfect sense .

But then he has no clue regarding networking, so I guess he and I are about even.

And, I disagree wholeheartedly with your assessment of future needs for consumers and broadcast. I don't think we are talking about futuring for 10GB, as even _without _my crystal ball, I don't see consumers ever having to worry about that. Broadcast facilities don't either, as it is unlikely that they will ever (even in the next 25 years) have to deal with anything much above 3 GB speed. Not only that, they don't have to worry about ethernet runs over about 40-50 meters (making GB over 6e as good as it ever needs to get, even for 3 GB over those shorter lengths). Most of it is significantly shorter. Anything longer (or faster) than that is usually put on fiber.

And that only covers full baseband signals, which are rare in broadcast and absent in consumer settings. TV signals are usually compressed to some extent (neither you nor I have ever even come close to uncompressed HD signals, unless you count HDMI which is always derived from compressed signals, and even if you are a HD cinematographer by trade, as even most professional video is compressed before it leaves the camera). Broadcast compresses to mezzanine levels just to pipe stuff around the plant, and compression is rapidly improving, all of which makes that bandwidth to pipe ratio actually go the _other _direction.

That might sound like I'm going out on a limb, but if you look at the big picture, predicting 10GB needs for these sorts of facilities or for consumers is just ridiculous speculation. It is not really that hard to predict the future of networking needs for moving video around a broadcast facility or around your condo for the next 20 years, simply because it doesn't make sense to improve video quality much beyond what we have now even if it were financially practical to do so, which it won't be. Improving video quality beyond what your eyes can perceive is like building a car that can go 500 miles per hour just so you can drive it to work in bumper-to-bumper traffic.

There is a point of diminishing returns in increasing bandwidth either for quality (or QoS) versus cost, and we have pretty much already hit the sweet spot. Broadcasters are going to be just fine with 6e as their go-to ethernet solution for some time. Maybe if the cost of 7 comes down, they might go there, but there likely will be no real reason to even then.

Today, in 2010, the only real practical answer is 6e, which will future things to the point where the wire itself is so old it begins to disintegrate. IOW, the technical capability and suitability of the wire will still outlive its structural integrity and useful life. There will probably be an entire new protocol replacing TCP/IP and ethernet before then anyway.


----------



## hitokage (Jan 19, 2010)

I happen to work with some of the equipment myself - the IT and broadcast fields have crossing over quite a bit for quite a lot of years now. The relation between those two fields is quite different then something like broadcasting and medicine, or even IT and medicine.

If 10 gigabit as a need is a ridiculous speculation, then you are also saying that there isn't a need for CAT6, CAT6a, or the vendor made-up CAT6e (like CAT5e+). 10Gb is the next high-end standard with a 100Gb standard being worked on now. 1Gb was designed for CAT5 and there were some specific quality issues with attenuation, return loss, propagation delay, and delay skew among other things that necessitated the release of the CAT5e standard. If 10Gb isn't anywhere on the horizon, why spend even the slightest amount of extra money on it, when CAT5e meets and exceeds current requirements now and for some time to come? By the time you need something beyond 1Gb, 10Gb equipment will no longer be mainstream, and the cabling will have to be replaced anyway.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

TomCat,

You should know better. In 10 years or less, you'll look at your post and laugh at yourself.

I've had people tell me for decades already that whatever the hot product of the day was at the time was "fast enough" or "powerful enough" and that "no one will need anything more." In 1991, most of my friends thought I was wasting my money buying a HUGE 200 MB hard drive, because "everyone knows you'll never use all that space." When I bought a Pentium 133 MHz, I was told that no one needs such a powerful processor on a mere desktop. When I put 16 MB of RAM in it, I was told that anything over 8 MB of RAM was a complete waste. And when I replaced my 10base2 coax network with CAT5e, people thought I was crazy thinking that I'd ever have 100MB networking in my home, never mind GB.

The reality is that the data we're moving around today is going to seem "quaint" in a few years, just as those 320x200 MPEG1 video files seem like today, but at one time, they were state-of-the-art and "huge."

If there's one thing the computer industry should have taught *everyone* is that it's NEVER enough, because we are constantly wanting more and more and more from our systems. They don't call it Moore's _Hypothesis_...


----------

