A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) (uk.comp.home-networking) Discussion of all aspects of computer networking in the home, regardless of the platforms, software, topologies and protocols used. Examples of topics include recommendations for hardware or suppliers (e.g. NICs and cabling), protocols, servers, and specific network software. Advertising is not allowed.

Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 4th 05, 06:44 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Bonge Boo!
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...

This is doing my nut in. I have 2 reels of Cat-5e cabling. One is stranded
the other is solid core. I have been making my own cables up for years. I
never have a problem.

But recently I've been having problems with cables of over 10m. The weird
thing it seems to be specific to the computer attached to the cable.

Today I was at a site; cut a 15m stranded network cable. Linked up my
laptop, everything works fine. Was getting about 500Mb/min transfer speed, a
few dropped packets when pinging. Plugged the same cable into the PC it was
intended for, and suddenly was getting 25% packet loss, completely unusable
internet and network connectivity. Tried plugging in an Apple laptop to the
cable, again, the cable was fine.

So I cut a solid-core cable. Tested on the Macs, everything was dandy. Tried
on the PC, absolutely hopeless. Cut a little 8m cable of solid core,
everything fine on the PC. But that was too short to route the cable neatly.

Now unless I'm very much mistaken I should be able to get 25m run of
stranded cables and 100m with solid-core cables. So what the chuff is going
wrong here?

Do different network cards have variable sensitivity, and if so, who makes
"long-range" network cards?

If anyone out there has made up really long network cables, please tell me
the secret, but I obviously don't know it.

I should note these cables are plugged into a cheapo ADL router. Is it
possible that it isn't "amplifying" enough?

  #2  
Old May 4th 05, 07:27 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
MW0GUV
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...


"Bonge Boo!" wrote in message
...
This is doing my nut in. I have 2 reels of Cat-5e cabling. One is stranded
the other is solid core. I have been making my own cables up for years. I
never have a problem.

But recently I've been having problems with cables of over 10m. The weird
thing it seems to be specific to the computer attached to the cable.

Today I was at a site; cut a 15m stranded network cable. Linked up my
laptop, everything works fine. Was getting about 500Mb/min transfer speed,

a
few dropped packets when pinging. Plugged the same cable into the PC it

was
intended for, and suddenly was getting 25% packet loss, completely

unusable
internet and network connectivity. Tried plugging in an Apple laptop to

the
cable, again, the cable was fine.

So I cut a solid-core cable. Tested on the Macs, everything was dandy.

Tried
on the PC, absolutely hopeless. Cut a little 8m cable of solid core,
everything fine on the PC. But that was too short to route the cable

neatly.

Now unless I'm very much mistaken I should be able to get 25m run of
stranded cables and 100m with solid-core cables. So what the chuff is

going
wrong here?

Do different network cards have variable sensitivity, and if so, who makes
"long-range" network cards?

If anyone out there has made up really long network cables, please tell me
the secret, but I obviously don't know it.

I should note these cables are plugged into a cheapo ADL router. Is it
possible that it isn't "amplifying" enough?


Cat5e can be run up to 90M and still produce good results, this is of course
dependant on how the ends are made off, you need to ensure that minimal
outer insulation is removed, pairs remain twisted right up to the point of
connection and you are using the correct wiring scheme (568B)

Solid Cat5e is generally used for a Structured Cabling infrastructure with
stranded being used for patch leads.

Have you tried changing your Network Card?

Andy MW0GUV


  #3  
Old May 4th 05, 08:05 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Bonge Boo!
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...

On 4/5/05 7:27 pm, in article , "MW0GUV"
wrote:

Do different network cards have variable sensitivity, and if so, who makes
"long-range" network cards?

If anyone out there has made up really long network cables, please tell me
the secret, but I obviously don't know it.

I should note these cables are plugged into a cheapo ADL router. Is it
possible that it isn't "amplifying" enough?


Cat5e can be run up to 90M and still produce good results, this is of course
dependant on how the ends are made off, you need to ensure that minimal
outer insulation is removed, pairs remain twisted right up to the point of
connection and you are using the correct wiring scheme (568B)

Solid Cat5e is generally used for a Structured Cabling infrastructure with
stranded being used for patch leads.

Have you tried changing your Network Card?


No. Its the next port of call. But what I don't really understand is looking
at my ping statistics, certain machines appear to get fewer dropped packets
than others. Surely a network card is a network card, and as such they
should all be similiarly "sensitive" to crap or marginal cables?

  #4  
Old May 4th 05, 09:05 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
MW0GUV
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...


"Bonge Boo!" wrote in message
...
On 4/5/05 7:27 pm, in article , "MW0GUV"
wrote:

Do different network cards have variable sensitivity, and if so, who

makes
"long-range" network cards?

If anyone out there has made up really long network cables, please tell

me
the secret, but I obviously don't know it.

I should note these cables are plugged into a cheapo ADL router. Is it
possible that it isn't "amplifying" enough?


Cat5e can be run up to 90M and still produce good results, this is of

course
dependant on how the ends are made off, you need to ensure that minimal
outer insulation is removed, pairs remain twisted right up to the point

of
connection and you are using the correct wiring scheme (568B)

Solid Cat5e is generally used for a Structured Cabling infrastructure

with
stranded being used for patch leads.

Have you tried changing your Network Card?


No. Its the next port of call. But what I don't really understand is

looking
at my ping statistics, certain machines appear to get fewer dropped

packets
than others. Surely a network card is a network card, and as such they
should all be similiarly "sensitive" to crap or marginal cables?


Your network is only as good as the infrastructure...Forget wireless it's a
farce. Install quality Cat5e cabling and all will be well.

Network cards are like the rest of the cheap mass produced PC related
products.....you get what you pay for


  #5  
Old May 4th 05, 09:47 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Beck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...


"Bonge Boo!" wrote in message
...

No. Its the next port of call. But what I don't really understand is
looking
at my ping statistics, certain machines appear to get fewer dropped
packets
than others. Surely a network card is a network card, and as such they
should all be similiarly "sensitive" to crap or marginal cables?


I am no expert but I have found differences with cheaper network cards.


  #6  
Old May 5th 05, 02:29 AM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Rob Morley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,379
Default Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...

In article , "MW0GUV"
says...

"Bonge Boo!" wrote in message
...
On 4/5/05 7:27 pm, in article , "MW0GUV"
wrote:

Do different network cards have variable sensitivity, and if so, who

makes
"long-range" network cards?

If anyone out there has made up really long network cables, please tell

me
the secret, but I obviously don't know it.

I should note these cables are plugged into a cheapo ADL router. Is it
possible that it isn't "amplifying" enough?


Cat5e can be run up to 90M and still produce good results, this is of

course
dependant on how the ends are made off, you need to ensure that minimal
outer insulation is removed, pairs remain twisted right up to the point

of
connection and you are using the correct wiring scheme (568B)

Solid Cat5e is generally used for a Structured Cabling infrastructure

with
stranded being used for patch leads.

Have you tried changing your Network Card?


No. Its the next port of call. But what I don't really understand is

looking
at my ping statistics, certain machines appear to get fewer dropped

packets
than others. Surely a network card is a network card, and as such they
should all be similiarly "sensitive" to crap or marginal cables?


Your network is only as good as the infrastructure...Forget wireless it's a
farce. Install quality Cat5e cabling and all will be well.


Nobody said anything about wireless.

Network cards are like the rest of the cheap mass produced PC related
products.....you get what you pay for

Some cheap cards are every bit as good as top brands, and IME if you
stick to one sort throughout you'll rarely have problems.
  #7  
Old May 5th 05, 10:33 AM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
John Fryatt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 66
Default Maximum network cable lengths. Doing my head in...

Bonge Boo! wrote:
On 4/5/05 7:27 pm, in article , "MW0GUV"
wrote:

snip

Have you tried changing your Network Card?


No. Its the next port of call. But what I don't really understand is looking
at my ping statistics, certain machines appear to get fewer dropped packets
than others. Surely a network card is a network card, and as such they
should all be similiarly "sensitive" to crap or marginal cables?


Surely you are answering your own question? Your actions so far have
been good, and would seem to point to the NIC in the PC in question
being doubtful. In theory NICs are built to a 'standard' of some kind,
but production methods, quality control, etc. can vary so your card
might not up to snuff. They are quite cheap so I'd try another one.
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Advice req re cable lengths brian j uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 5 April 19th 04 05:13 PM
Maximum range of wireless network. i-ball uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 1 February 13th 04 11:25 AM
Checking line lengths Nicholas F Hodder uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 January 5th 04 09:02 AM
wireless network- maximum range Chalkie uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 5 November 24th 03 09:54 PM
Can I convert a FastCat5e network cable into a crossover cable? Sherri & Garry January uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 10 October 30th 03 05:19 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2019 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.