The diameter of a 10Mbps Ethernet collision domain is much bigger than 100m (you can calculate it from the smallest allowed frame size, the transmission speed, and the signal propagation speed), so that limit is most definitely not based on collisions.
Thanks, Zsombor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I have a question regarding the max length for a 100BaseT > cable. Granted I > haven't done a wealth of research on this so feel free to point > me to > google if the answer is mind numbingly simple, which it > probably is.... > > I have always understood the 100M limitation on 10BaseT > ethernet cable to > be attributable to the time it would take a collision signal - > assuming you > are running at half duplex - to be returned in time to prevent > the next > packet from being sent. In other words any longer than 100M and > the sending > station would not get the message in time that there had been a > collision > and thus continue sending packets instead of backing off. I > have heard > attenuation mentioned, but not as the "real" reason for the > distance limit. > > My question is given that many stations are running 100 full > duplex these > days - thus removing the collision concerns - does this > effectively change > the maximum distance for cable runs? Or is attenuation truly a > factor in > anything over 100M? > > In general I am referring to standard Cat5 cabling.... > > Just curious... > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=74833&t=74776 -------------------------------------------------- **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
