Re: fiber - cat5 - wireless
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Helber wrote: >What is the best way to conect two points at about 350 m away? >When I say best I´m talking about $ and performance. Here's what I would do if I was paying. 350m is twice the maximum length of a segment of 10baseT/100baseT. So put a cheap hub or switch between them. You may think it's crazy to use a switch, but when you consider that a cheap switch (like the one I've got in my loungue) costs $120 and gives you 100M full duplex it's probably worth it. The only problem with this is that it relies on there being a good half-way point that you can run a switch. If you are considering running a line between two buildings then this won't work. But if the line is outside then there's the issue of electrical interferance and earth-loops. In that case I would consider the bandwidth requirements. If 2Mb/s is all you need then WaveLAN is a good solution. It can do 1Km with ease and 4Km+ if you use the right antennas and there's no interferance (NB it is generally not advertised as being capable of really long distances). WaveLAN does 2Mb/s over unregulated frequencies (you don't need a permit). Currently work is in progress on IEEE 802.11 wireless at 11Mb/s speed. AFAIK there are no available products that implement it. If all these options are unsuitable then you can use fiber. Fiber apparently isn't as difficult as it used to be. A former colleague of mine was considering implementing a gigabit Ethernet network in his home because fiber is so cheap and easy! This thing of taking an hour to do a termination is apparently a thing of the past. Russell Coker
Re: fiber - cat5 - wireless
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Helber wrote: >What is the best way to conect two points at about 350 m away? >When I say best I´m talking about $ and performance. Here's what I would do if I was paying. 350m is twice the maximum length of a segment of 10baseT/100baseT. So put a cheap hub or switch between them. You may think it's crazy to use a switch, but when you consider that a cheap switch (like the one I've got in my loungue) costs $120 and gives you 100M full duplex it's probably worth it. The only problem with this is that it relies on there being a good half-way point that you can run a switch. If you are considering running a line between two buildings then this won't work. But if the line is outside then there's the issue of electrical interferance and earth-loops. In that case I would consider the bandwidth requirements. If 2Mb/s is all you need then WaveLAN is a good solution. It can do 1Km with ease and 4Km+ if you use the right antennas and there's no interferance (NB it is generally not advertised as being capable of really long distances). WaveLAN does 2Mb/s over unregulated frequencies (you don't need a permit). Currently work is in progress on IEEE 802.11 wireless at 11Mb/s speed. AFAIK there are no available products that implement it. If all these options are unsuitable then you can use fiber. Fiber apparently isn't as difficult as it used to be. A former colleague of mine was considering implementing a gigabit Ethernet network in his home because fiber is so cheap and easy! This thing of taking an hour to do a termination is apparently a thing of the past. Russell Coker -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: fiber - cat5 - wireless
On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 09:23:36PM -0300, Helber wrote: > What is the best way to conect two points at about 350 m away? That's too far for CAT5. If you can lay fibre between the two locations, I'd do that since it will give you the opportunity to have GigaBit Ethernet in the future... something wireless can't do. Make sure you get an appropriate cable with at least four fibre strands. You need two for each "link". Having two for backup is just good insurance. -- Luca Filipozzi [dpkg] We are the apt. Resistance is futile. You will be packaged.
fiber - cat5 - wireless
What is the best way to conect two points at about 350 m away? When I say best I´m talking about $ and performance. thanks. -Mensagem Original- De: R K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Para: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Enviada em: Terça-feira, 25 de Julho de 2000 10:14 Assunto: Re: fiber > Generally you just use fiber on your backbone or high traffic areas and cat5 > the rest of the network. Fiber is expensive, fragile and requires skilled > personnel to install correctly. I remember sitting for almost an hour once > watching this guy carefully strip, clean and polish a section of fiber. You > should do some testing on your network to see if you actually need anything > more than 100mbps before you commit. I dunno, that's just my experience > with it. > > Can someone comment here on reasons to use fiber for network cable now > instead of old style standard cat5 cable? > I see lots of fiber equipment out there but 100mbps is 100mbps right? > Is fiber economical when you get into over 100mbps situations? > thanks. > >
Re: fiber - cat5 - wireless
On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 09:23:36PM -0300, Helber wrote: > What is the best way to conect two points at about 350 m away? That's too far for CAT5. If you can lay fibre between the two locations, I'd do that since it will give you the opportunity to have GigaBit Ethernet in the future... something wireless can't do. Make sure you get an appropriate cable with at least four fibre strands. You need two for each "link". Having two for backup is just good insurance. -- Luca Filipozzi [dpkg] We are the apt. Resistance is futile. You will be packaged. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fiber - cat5 - wireless
What is the best way to conect two points at about 350 m away? When I say best I´m talking about $ and performance. thanks. -Mensagem Original- De: R K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Para: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Enviada em: Terça-feira, 25 de Julho de 2000 10:14 Assunto: Re: fiber > Generally you just use fiber on your backbone or high traffic areas and cat5 > the rest of the network. Fiber is expensive, fragile and requires skilled > personnel to install correctly. I remember sitting for almost an hour once > watching this guy carefully strip, clean and polish a section of fiber. You > should do some testing on your network to see if you actually need anything > more than 100mbps before you commit. I dunno, that's just my experience > with it. > > Can someone comment here on reasons to use fiber for network cable now > instead of old style standard cat5 cable? > I see lots of fiber equipment out there but 100mbps is 100mbps right? > Is fiber economical when you get into over 100mbps situations? > thanks. > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
