| Author |
Message |
Kenneth
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:07 pm Post subject:
Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Howdy,
I have two systems that are about 600 feet apart.
They are currently connected by (and forgive me if I don't
have the proper name) 10-Base-2 with BNC fittings running
underground between two buildings.
This cable was chosen over Cat 5 because of the distance.
As currently configured, the net between these two systems
runs at 10 Mbps and that generates a few questions:
Are there faster alternatives in our situation? Are there
faster alternatives that could run over the same cable?
Specifically, might our current speed limitation be caused
by the cards we use? Might there be cards available that use
BNC fittings on such cable but run at higher speeds?
We would be interested in increasing speed at reasonable
costs and could certainly run another cable if that were the
way to go. I will add that I have used our current setup for
about four years and except for the speed, it has functioned
reasonably well.
Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
James Knott
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:11 pm Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Kenneth wrote:
| Quote: |
Howdy,
I have two systems that are about 600 feet apart.
They are currently connected by (and forgive me if I don't
have the proper name) 10-Base-2 with BNC fittings running
underground between two buildings.
This cable was chosen over Cat 5 because of the distance.
As currently configured, the net between these two systems
runs at 10 Mbps and that generates a few questions:
Are there faster alternatives in our situation? Are there
faster alternatives that could run over the same cable?
Specifically, might our current speed limitation be caused
by the cards we use? Might there be cards available that use
BNC fittings on such cable but run at higher speeds?
We would be interested in increasing speed at reasonable
costs and could certainly run another cable if that were the
way to go. I will add that I have used our current setup for
about four years and except for the speed, it has functioned
reasonably well.
Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
|
There are no standard, inexpensive methods to run more than 10 Mb over coax
cable. If there's power available midway, you could run a switch to
regenerate the signal. Failing that, your best bet would be fibre. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kenneth
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:17 pm Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:11:20 -0500, James Knott
<james.knott@rogers.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Kenneth wrote:
Howdy,
I have two systems that are about 600 feet apart.
They are currently connected by (and forgive me if I don't
have the proper name) 10-Base-2 with BNC fittings running
underground between two buildings.
This cable was chosen over Cat 5 because of the distance.
As currently configured, the net between these two systems
runs at 10 Mbps and that generates a few questions:
Are there faster alternatives in our situation? Are there
faster alternatives that could run over the same cable?
Specifically, might our current speed limitation be caused
by the cards we use? Might there be cards available that use
BNC fittings on such cable but run at higher speeds?
We would be interested in increasing speed at reasonable
costs and could certainly run another cable if that were the
way to go. I will add that I have used our current setup for
about four years and except for the speed, it has functioned
reasonably well.
Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
There are no standard, inexpensive methods to run more than 10 Mb over coax
cable. If there's power available midway, you could run a switch to
regenerate the signal. Failing that, your best bet would be fibre.
|
Hello again,
Thanks for the speedy response.
I should have said that we have no access between the two
systems.
If I were to go the fibre (or fiber <g>) route could I get
significantly increased speeds? And, if so, would the costs
be insane?
Thanks for any further information,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Al Dykes
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:31 pm Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
In article <7b6v01h28t8pi2b3eholc8lb3ogs0qpf38@4ax.com>,
Kenneth <usenet@SPAMLESSsoleassociates.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:11:20 -0500, James Knott
james.knott@rogers.com> wrote:
Kenneth wrote:
Howdy,
I have two systems that are about 600 feet apart.
They are currently connected by (and forgive me if I don't
have the proper name) 10-Base-2 with BNC fittings running
underground between two buildings.
This cable was chosen over Cat 5 because of the distance.
As currently configured, the net between these two systems
runs at 10 Mbps and that generates a few questions:
Are there faster alternatives in our situation? Are there
faster alternatives that could run over the same cable?
Specifically, might our current speed limitation be caused
by the cards we use? Might there be cards available that use
BNC fittings on such cable but run at higher speeds?
We would be interested in increasing speed at reasonable
costs and could certainly run another cable if that were the
way to go. I will add that I have used our current setup for
about four years and except for the speed, it has functioned
reasonably well.
Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
There are no standard, inexpensive methods to run more than 10 Mb over coax
cable. If there's power available midway, you could run a switch to
regenerate the signal. Failing that, your best bet would be fibre.
Hello again,
Thanks for the speedy response.
I should have said that we have no access between the two
systems.
If I were to go the fibre (or fiber <g>) route could I get
significantly increased speeds? And, if so, would the costs
be insane?
Thanks for any further information,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
|
Can some knowledgable person post the product description for the
lowest-tech fiber that's appropriate for something like this, and an
appx cost per foot.
Also the URL for the economy model transeivers appropriate to convert
the fiber to RJ45 appropriate to be patched into a hub/switch.
What are the cost/distance/speed tradeoffs for 10Mb and faster, up to
100Mb/sec. ?
This gets discussed lots but I don't recall it ever being reduced to
numbers. It should be Q#1 for a FAQ document.
Thanks
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Al Dykes
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:35 pm Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
In article <cuo6e5$buk$1@panix5.panix.com>, Al Dykes <adykes@panix.com> wrote:
| Quote: | In article <7b6v01h28t8pi2b3eholc8lb3ogs0qpf38@4ax.com>,
Kenneth <usenet@SPAMLESSsoleassociates.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:11:20 -0500, James Knott
james.knott@rogers.com> wrote:
Kenneth wrote:
Howdy,
I have two systems that are about 600 feet apart.
They are currently connected by (and forgive me if I don't
have the proper name) 10-Base-2 with BNC fittings running
underground between two buildings.
This cable was chosen over Cat 5 because of the distance.
As currently configured, the net between these two systems
runs at 10 Mbps and that generates a few questions:
Are there faster alternatives in our situation? Are there
faster alternatives that could run over the same cable?
Specifically, might our current speed limitation be caused
by the cards we use? Might there be cards available that use
BNC fittings on such cable but run at higher speeds?
We would be interested in increasing speed at reasonable
costs and could certainly run another cable if that were the
way to go. I will add that I have used our current setup for
about four years and except for the speed, it has functioned
reasonably well.
Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
There are no standard, inexpensive methods to run more than 10 Mb over coax
cable. If there's power available midway, you could run a switch to
regenerate the signal. Failing that, your best bet would be fibre.
Hello again,
Thanks for the speedy response.
I should have said that we have no access between the two
systems.
If I were to go the fibre (or fiber <g>) route could I get
significantly increased speeds? And, if so, would the costs
be insane?
Thanks for any further information,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
Can some knowledgable person post the product description for the
lowest-tech fiber that's appropriate for something like this, and an
appx cost per foot.
Also the URL for the economy model transeivers appropriate to convert
the fiber to RJ45 appropriate to be patched into a hub/switch.
What are the cost/distance/speed tradeoffs for 10Mb and faster, up to
100Mb/sec. ?
This gets discussed lots but I don't recall it ever being reduced to
numbers. It should be Q#1 for a FAQ document.
Thanks
---
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
|
Also what kind of one-off field termination is appropriate for this
kind of DIY fiber project ?
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Redelmeier
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:56 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Kenneth <usenet@spamlesssoleassociates.com> wrote:
| Quote: | If I were to go the fibre (or fiber <g>) route could I get
significantly increased speeds? And, if so, would the costs
be insane?
|
Yes, you could go from 10 Mbit/s to 100 Mbit/s fairly
easily (especially if that coax is in a straight conduit).
Installation is the big variable.
Whether it helps or not is a totally different question,
and depends greatly on the nature of the traffic between
the systems. For many apps, 10 is more than enough. But
big pushers like backup or imaging can benefit from more.
-- Robert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kenneth
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:32 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 20:56:14 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: | Kenneth <usenet@spamlesssoleassociates.com> wrote:
If I were to go the fibre (or fiber <g>) route could I get
significantly increased speeds? And, if so, would the costs
be insane?
Yes, you could go from 10 Mbit/s to 100 Mbit/s fairly
easily (especially if that coax is in a straight conduit).
Installation is the big variable.
Whether it helps or not is a totally different question,
and depends greatly on the nature of the traffic between
the systems. For many apps, 10 is more than enough. But
big pushers like backup or imaging can benefit from more.
-- Robert
|
Hi Robert,
It is for imaging that this is all of interest to me...
The main run is close to straight, but inside the buildings
that is definitely not the case.
Why would the run being straight matter?
Thanks,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James Knott
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:50 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Kenneth wrote:
| Quote: | If I were to go the fibre (or fiber <g>) route could I get
significantly increased speeds? And, if so, would the costs
be insane?
|
Yes. ;-)
Fibre can be much faster than copper, though somewhat more expensive to
install. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James Knott
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:52 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Al Dykes wrote:
| Quote: | Also what kind of one-off field termination is appropriate for this
kind of DIY fiber project ?
|
If only one off, I'd be temped to go with pre terminated cables.
It's been a while, but when I used to buy fibre cables, I usually had them
terminated by the supplier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James Knott
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:53 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Kenneth wrote:
| Quote: | Why would the run being straight matter?
|
The photons have to slow down for the curves. ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Redelmeier
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:45 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Kenneth <usenet@spamlesssoleassociates.com> wrote:
| Quote: | It is for imaging that this is all of interest to me...
|
Ah, so you probably really do need the bandwidth.
| Quote: | The main run is close to straight, but inside the buildings
that is definitely not the case.
|
If the run is straight conduit, it is much easier to pull
in a fiber line. Corners make long pulls tough.
-- Robert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kenneth
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:03 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 22:45:58 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: | Kenneth <usenet@spamlesssoleassociates.com> wrote:
It is for imaging that this is all of interest to me...
Ah, so you probably really do need the bandwidth.
The main run is close to straight, but inside the buildings
that is definitely not the case.
If the run is straight conduit, it is much easier to pull
in a fiber line. Corners make long pulls tough.
-- Robert
|
OP here...
Is pulling fiber materially different from pulling other
forms of cable such as the 10-Base-2 we now have?
Thanks,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kenneth
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:50:23 -0500, James Knott
<james.knott@rogers.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Kenneth wrote:
If I were to go the fibre (or fiber <g>) route could I get
significantly increased speeds? And, if so, would the costs
be insane?
Yes. ;-)
Fibre can be much faster than copper, though somewhat more expensive to
install.
|
Hi again,
Might you have a source to suggest for information about
those costs?
Sincere thanks,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:20 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
"Kenneth" <usenet@SPAMLESSsoleassociates.com> wrote in message
news:7l5v01lg1ldnggbehjhmj097cd4l5cenu8@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
Howdy,
I have two systems that are about 600 feet apart.
They are currently connected by (and forgive me if I don't
have the proper name) 10-Base-2 with BNC fittings running
underground between two buildings.
This cable was chosen over Cat 5 because of the distance.
As currently configured, the net between these two systems
runs at 10 Mbps and that generates a few questions:
Are there faster alternatives in our situation? Are there
faster alternatives that could run over the same cable?
Specifically, might our current speed limitation be caused
by the cards we use? Might there be cards available that use
BNC fittings on such cable but run at higher speeds?
We would be interested in increasing speed at reasonable
costs and could certainly run another cable if that were the
way to go. I will add that I have used our current setup for
about four years and except for the speed, it has functioned
reasonably well.
|
Replace the cable with fiber optic cable. You'll then be able to run 10
or 100 (or more) depending on the media converters you use on the ends.
We use a lot of Milan converters, but there are many other brands that
work as well.
http://www.milan.com/converters/fast_ether_conv.html
shows some of their products. The stand alone Classic Converter lets
you plug into anything with an ethernet port. But I see what looks like
cards that go inside the PC, which might be more convenient, and
cheaper.
| Quote: | Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James Knott
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:41 am Post subject:
Re: Faster net over 600'...? |
|
|
Kenneth wrote:
| Quote: | Is pulling fiber materially different from pulling other
forms of cable such as the 10-Base-2 we now have?
|
It's easier to break.
Also, if you check, you'll find it is spelled "fibre", not "fiber". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in