Elliot Finley wrote:
> A T1 can only run about 600 feet. Yes, that's right, 600 feet.
> When people talk about T1s running long distances, the reference
> to 'T1' is only the signalling at the end. In the middle, that
> "T1" will be carried by other methods such as SONET over fiber for
> very l
Just for the archives:
A T1 can only run about 600 feet. Yes, that's right, 600 feet. When people
talk about T1s running long distances, the reference to 'T1' is only the
signalling at the end. In the middle, that "T1" will be carried by other
methods such as SONET over fiber for very long dista
Check www.gnswireless.com (this from a satisfied customer)
That said, I also use the method of placing mini ethernet switches or
hubs (electrically a multiport repeater and damned hard to find now)
every so often to reach distant parts of our warehouses. These are
powered, of course. POE mig
> > Option 2: Put an ordinary DSL modem at one end and a DSLAM at the
> > other end. Again I'm not sure what the range is, but DSL used to
> > be referred to as the solution for "the last mile" from the telco
> > to the customer so it may be up to the job.
>
> I could recommend this too, becau
Hi,
Am 2009-07-17 00:47:57, schrieb per...@pluto.rain.com:
> Option 2: Put an ordinary DSL modem at one end and a DSLAM at the
> other end. Again I'm not sure what the range is, but DSL used to
> be referred to as the solution for "the last mile" from the telco
> to the customer so it may be up
Hi,
> AFAIK neither of these really needs the signal quality of Cat 5 --
> they both should work just fine over Cat 3 -- but surely the higher
> grade wire can't hurt (and it may increase the usable DSL distance).
I think I remember that the gauge of Ethernet cable is smaller than
the one of phon
David Kelly wrote:
> Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there
> that two machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of
> cat5 with no special hardware?
After reading (at least most of) the discussion that has arisen
from this, I've had another thought which would u
>Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there that two
>machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
>special hardware?
>
>IIRC the classic Ethernet problem limiting the distance between the
>farthest points on a network had to do with timing and collisions
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 04:33:24PM -0400, Michael Powell wrote:
> David Kelly wrote:
> >
> > Last sentences in last paragraph before See Also at
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_sense_multiple_access_with_collision_detection:
> >
> > "Also, in Full Duplex Ethernet, collisions are impos
David Kelly wrote:
[snip]
>
> But it is turned off. A full duplex switch does not echo the sender's
> bits back to the sender's receiver. A full duplex switch buffers the
> incoming bits, reads the header, selects an output port, and then starts
> sending the bits to that one port out of the FIF
Michael Powell writes:
> You are running Ethernet, right? CSMA/CD is part of the Ethernet framing
> protocol. It is present in the protocol independent of simplex/duplex, etc.
> As such the timing windows contain non-infinite discreet value ranges. It is
> integral to Ethernet and does not get
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 02:49:11AM -0400, Michael Powell wrote:
> David Kelly wrote:
>
> > Since when does one have CSMA/CD when configured as full duplex? All
> > full duplex ethernet connections are point to point, machine to
> > machine, or machine to switch. There is no multiple access on full
David Kelly wrote:
>
> Since when does one have CSMA/CD when configured as full duplex? All
> full duplex ethernet connections are point to point, machine to
> machine, or machine to switch. There is no multiple access on full
> duplex. No chance of collision.
You are running Ethernet, right? CS
David,
> > You would need 5 boxes, the connections between each run of cable
> > could cause too many loss, even if the timing was not an issue.
> Wire connections are not all that lossy.
You would be surprised by the impedance missmatch tests made by
cabling companies...
> Meanwhile cat5 is use
On Jul 15, 2009, at 5:41 PM, Michael Powell wrote:
David Kelly wrote:
Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there
that two
machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
special hardware?
IIRC the classic ethernet problem limiting the distance betwe
On Jul 15, 2009, at 9:25 PM, Olivier Nicole wrote:
The max distance for UTP is 328 ft. Divide the 5,000 by 328 and it
will tell
you how many bridges, hubs, or switches you will need to
regenerate the
signal. You may find devices purporting to 'range extenders', but
even these
will have di
Hi,
A general reply to many suggestions.
> So the time it takes for the smallest Ethernet frame to get from the two
> farthest nodes will determine a window in which the two most distant nodes
> upon attempting a transmit can tell that a collision occurred and
> retransmit.
In a case of point
On Wed 2009-07-15 22:27:35 UTC+0200, Michelle Konzack
(bsd4miche...@tamay-dogan.net) wrote:
> > Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there that two
> > machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
> > special hardware?
>
> I do not know hoe much a feet
David Kelly wrote:
> Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there that two
> machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
> special hardware?
>
> IIRC the classic ethernet problem limiting the distance between the
> farthest points on a network had to do
Hello *,
Am 2009-07-15 17:38:33, schrieb mikel.k...@olivent.com:
> David,
>
>
> You can run upto 1.5 miles on a lx fiber based solution but will likely
> require a skilled installer to setup that much cable for you.
>
> Depending on your locale I am may be able to put connect you to a supplie
<20090715202734.gh29...@tamay-dogan.net>
<20090715210752.ge16...@grumpy.dyndns.org>
From: Mikel
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:38:21 -0400
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
David,
You can run upto 1.5 miles on a lx fiber based solution but will like
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:27:35PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello David,
>
> Am 2009-07-15 14:47:18, schrieb David Kelly:
> > Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there that two
> > machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
> > special hardwar
Hello David,
Am 2009-07-15 14:47:18, schrieb David Kelly:
> Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there that two
> machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
> special hardware?
I do not know hoe much a feet is in meters but AFAIK arround 0,3 which
mea
David Kelly wrote:
Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there that two
machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
special hardware?
IIRC the classic ethernet problem limiting the distance between the
farthest points on a network had to do with timing
Not directly FreeBSD related, but how much of a chance is there that two
machines could communicate directly over 5,000 feet of cat5 with no
special hardware?
IIRC the classic ethernet problem limiting the distance between the
farthest points on a network had to do with timing and collisions. If
t
25 matches
Mail list logo
