Faster net over 600'...?
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Phil Partridge on February 15, 2005, 12:30 pm
Please log in for more thread options >
>> Kenneth wrote:
>> >> > 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". >
Of course. Despite what they might think, most of 'us' are not in the
>Only if you're not in the U.S. ;-) > >Seems that the Nat'l Institute of Standards and Technology, a part of >the U.S. Gov't, uses the term fiber extensively. >http://externalsearch.nist.gov/search?q=fiber&btnG=Google+Search&site=de >fault_collection&output=xml_no_dtd&client=default_frontend&sort=date%3AD >%3AL%3Ad1&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&oe=UTF-8 > > US. Also, you can get by in most of the world with English, not American. ;-) There is a difference. Just listen to George 'Dubya'. Phil Partridge philp@pebbleGRIT.demon.co.uk Remove the grit to reply | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by T. Sean Weintz on February 15, 2005, 8:43 pm
Please log in for more thread options Phil Partridge wrote: > In article <1113dkp
> > There is a difference. Just listen to George 'Dubya'. Not as big a difference as there is between "the Queen's English" and "Queens English" (as in Queens, New York) ;-P | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Robert Redelmeier on February 14, 2005, 6:34 am
Please log in for more thread options > Is pulling fiber materially different from pulling other
> forms of cable such as the 10-Base-2 we now have? Not much different. Fiber cables are usually more flexible than coax. Easier to pull. They use kevlar for strength, but still can break. Fiber really doesn't like tight bends. -- Robert | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Watson A.Name - \"Watt Sun, th on February 13, 2005, 8:20 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>
> 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. > Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
> --
> Kenneth > > If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Kenneth on February 23, 2005, 10:06 pm
Please log in for more thread options
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 17:20:03 -0800, "Watson A.Name - "Watt >
>>
>> 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. > >> Sincere thanks for any suggestions about this,
>
>> --
>> Kenneth >> >> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." >
Hello again, OP here, Ah, technology... I have contacted several folks who install this sort of cabling and have informal quotes from $800 to $4000. Perhaps I am missing something, but... If I were to get appropriate cable, have it assembled with appropriate end fittings, and plug each end into an appropriate media converter it would seem that the job would be done at a cost significantly below the lowest estimate I have received. Is there any (real) reason that I could not do all this myself? Sincere thanks, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Faster net over 600'...? | February 13, 2005, 4:07 pm |