DComTalk.com

Hi All

A while ago I posted a question regarding alternative connectors suitable
for Ethernet.
I expected the options we tried to work, but nevertheless other powers
insisted to do
tests, which I did... We rented a Network Cable Tester Here is the verdict.

All the connectors did work. The DB9 etc. range were also tested and
performed the
best. Other 4/5 pin connectors were tested and although some performed
better than
others, all passed CAT5e testing. It seems that connectors with straight
pins (i.e. no
90' PCB mount styles) performed better.

Emtech <noaddress> wrote:

A while ago I posted a question regarding alternative
connectors suitable for Ethernet. I expected the options
we tried to work, but nevertheless other powers insisted to
do tests, which I did... We rented a Network Cable Tester
Here is the verdict.

All the connectors did work. The DB9 etc. range were also
tested and performed the best. Other 4/5 pin connectors were
tested and although some performed better than others, all
passed CAT5e testing. It seems that connectors with straight
pins (i.e. no 90' PCB mount styles) performed better.

Thanks for the report-back. I'm not surprised DB9 works. It
might have more untwist than RJ, but it has fewer right-angles.
There are wierd self-inductive effects in conductors with
sharp right angles. Good PCB traces have 2 45deg turns.

-- Robert

In article <pE6mf.28336$dO2.27787@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>,
Robert Redelmeier <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:

James Knott <james.knott@rogers.com> wrote:
ARRGGHHH!!!! It's not DB9. It's DE9!!!
Check the connector manufacturer catalogs.

Strictly correct. However, DB9 is common usage.
_Very_ common: Google gives only 688 hits for
DE9 connector while 530,000 for DB9 connector.

A similar situation occurs with "RJ45", which strictly speaking is
a keyed 8p8c modular connector wired for a analog leased line modem,
sharing no wiring in common with 10/100 ethernet.

Not only is the designation incorrect for ethernet, but the specified
connector and wiring pattern for RJ45 are incompatable with ethernet.


--
-- Welcome My Son, Welcome To The Machine --
Bob Vaughan | techie @ tantivy.net |
| P.O. Box 19792, Stanford, Ca 94309 |
-- I am Me, I am only Me, And no one else is Me, What could be simpler? --

"Emtech" <noaddress> wrote:

All the connectors did work. The DB9 etc.

ARRGGHHH!!!! It's not DB9. It's DE9!!!
Check the connector manufacturer catalogs.

James Knott <james.knott@rogers.com> wrote:

ARRGGHHH!!!! It's not DB9. It's DE9!!!
Check the connector manufacturer catalogs.

Strictly correct. However, DB9 is common usage.
_Very_ common: Google gives only 688 hits for
DE9 connector while 530,000 for DB9 connector.

-- Robert

Bob Vaughan wrote:

A similar situation occurs with "RJ45", which strictly speaking is
a keyed 8p8c modular connector wired for a analog leased line modem,
sharing no wiring in common with 10/100 ethernet.

Not only is the designation incorrect for ethernet, but the specified
connector and wiring pattern for RJ45 are incompatable with ethernet.

I thought Registered Jack 45 was correct for both, but the wiring
itself was different. i.e. the "housing" of RJ45 is common to both,
but wiring is different.

--

hsb


"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
**************************ROT13 MY ADDRESS*************************
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
********************************************************************

Hansang Bae wrote:

Bob Vaughan wrote:
A similar situation occurs with "RJ45", which strictly speaking is
a keyed 8p8c modular connector wired for a analog leased line modem,
sharing no wiring in common with 10/100 ethernet.

Not only is the designation incorrect for ethernet, but the specified
connector and wiring pattern for RJ45 are incompatable with ethernet.


I thought Registered Jack 45 was correct for both, but the wiring
itself was different. i.e. the "housing" of RJ45 is common to both,
but wiring is different.

The Amp site gets numerous hits on "RJ45" but none at all on "8p8c". OTOH,
Froogle gets about 2500 hits on "8p8c" most of them plugs or jacks, vs
about 15,000 for "RJ45 plug", most of them either on cables or consumer
packaged.


--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Hansang Bae wrote:

(snip)

I thought Registered Jack 45 was correct for both, but the wiring
itself was different. i.e. the "housing" of RJ45 is common to both,
but wiring is different.

That is what is different between RJ series and the DB (DA ... DE)
series. The RJ series specifies not only the plug and jack, but the
wiring, too.

RJ11, RJ12, and RJ13 all use the same six contact plug/jack but with
different wiring.

-- glen

In article <N92dnY69iPYCDAbenZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

Hansang Bae wrote:

(snip)

I thought Registered Jack 45 was correct for both, but the wiring
itself was different. i.e. the "housing" of RJ45 is common to both,
but wiring is different.

That is what is different between RJ series and the DB (DA ... DE)
series. The RJ series specifies not only the plug and jack, but the
wiring, too.

RJ11, RJ12, and RJ13 all use the same six contact plug/jack but with
different wiring.

Don't forget RJ14 and RJ25.

RJ12 and RJ13 are very similar, but are incompatible with RJ14 or RJ25,
can anybody guess why?

What is the difference between RJ12 and RJ13?

What happens when you plug a phone wired for RJ12/RJ13 into a jack wired
for RJ14 or RJ25?

What RJ arrangements do not use a modular connector?


The concept behind the Registered jack is the Universal Service Ordering Code
(or USOC), which is used by the telephone companies to define specific
services, such as custom calling features, billing arangements, or physical
connections. The idea being that you can order services from any telco
in the country, using the USOC, and receive the same service no matter who
the telco is, or where in the country you are located.


--
-- Welcome My Son, Welcome To The Machine --
Bob Vaughan | techie @ tantivy.net |
| P.O. Box 19792, Stanford, Ca 94309 |
-- I am Me, I am only Me, And no one else is Me, What could be simpler? --

Then there is RJ48.

http://www.arcelect.com/RJ_Jack_Glossary.htm

In article <1134310195.864043.327460@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
<anybody43@hotmail.com> wrote:

Then there is RJ48.

http://www.arcelect.com/RJ_Jack_Glossary.htm

There's a whole variety of RJxx designations, using about 5 different
connectors, in a variety of wiring patterns.


Connector types that I can think of offhand are:

6p6c modular (RJ11/12/13/14/16//17/18/19/25)
8p8c modular (RJ31/32/33/34/35/36/37/38/61)
8p8c keyed modular (RJ41/42/43/44/45/46/47/48)
50p ribbon type (RJ21/22/23/24/26/27/71)
3 pin miniature twist-lock connector (RJ15)


--
-- Welcome My Son, Welcome To The Machine --
Bob Vaughan | techie @ tantivy.net |
| P.O. Box 19792, Stanford, Ca 94309 |
-- I am Me, I am only Me, And no one else is Me, What could be simpler? --