CAT 3 with POTS drop?

Have a question or want to start a discussion? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Is there any real advantage of using cat 3 for inside wiring for a DSL
installation when the drop to the residence is only a POTS line?  The
baud rate would be limited by the drop, I would imagine, but would the
added CAT 3 (or better) make real difference with signal quality?
Underground drops aren't readily replaced by phone companies around
here.

Thanks for replies!
Greg



Re: CAT 3 with POTS drop?
darknesslite@hotmail.com wrote:
> Is there any real advantage of using cat 3 for inside wiring for a DSL
> installation when the drop to the residence is only a POTS line?  The
> baud rate would be limited by the drop, I would imagine, but would the
> added CAT 3 (or better) make real difference with signal quality?
> Underground drops aren't readily replaced by phone companies around
> here.
>
> Thanks for replies!
> Greg
>
TIA 570B recommends a minimum of Cat3 for any residential installation.
When I relocated mine, I used Cat5e just for the peace of mind knowing that
the little performance gain was enough.  Plus I had the cable on hand.
I'm sure that there are thousands upon thousands of people using IW for
their DSL without problems.  It's a judgment call.


Re: CAT 3 with POTS drop?
darknesslite@hotmail.com wrote:


> Is there any real advantage of using cat 3 for inside wiring for a DSL
> installation when the drop to the residence is only a POTS line?  The
> baud rate would be limited by the drop, I would imagine, but would the
> added CAT 3 (or better) make real difference with signal quality?
> Underground drops aren't readily replaced by phone companies around
> here.

> Thanks for replies!
> Greg

Skip CAT3. Use at least CAT5E for ALL your wiring, voice and data. This
way you'll take advantage of the higher throughput if you re-allocate a
voice drop and make it a data drop in the future. True, it will not
improve your DSL, but in reality you should not even distribute your DSL
throughout the house: you should terminate it on a DSL modem which will be
sitting next to your patch panel.


--
Dmitri Abaimov, RCDD
http://www.cabling-design.com
Cabling Forum, color codes, pinouts and other useful resources for
premises cabling users and pros
http://www.cabling-design.com/homecabling
Residential Cabling Guide
-------------------------------------




##-----------------------------------------------##

Article posted with Cabling-Design.com Newsgroup Archive

http://www.cabling-design.com/forums

no-spam read and post WWW interface to your favorite newsgroup -

comp.dcom.cabling - 1077 messages and counting!

##-----------------------------------------------##


Re: CAT 3 with POTS drop?
Dmitri(Cabling-Design.com wrote:

> True, it will not
> improve your DSL, but in reality you should not even distribute your DSL
> throughout the house: you should terminate it on a DSL modem which will be
> sitting next to your patch panel.

I agree.  I hate seeing those filters, scattered around someone's home.
Split the signals near the entrance and send them over their own pairs or
cables.  A good choice for DSL, would be the 3rd pair in a 3 pair cable, as
most phones won't use that pair.




Re: CAT 3 with POTS drop?
darknesslite@hotmail.com wrote:

> Is there any real advantage of using cat 3 for inside wiring for a DSL
> installation when the drop to the residence is only a POTS line?  The
> baud rate would be limited by the drop, I would imagine, but would the
> added CAT 3 (or better) make real difference with signal quality?
> Underground drops aren't readily replaced by phone companies around
> here.

Cat 3 cable is better than most of that, which the DSL signal passes over.
It won't do much either way.  However, if you're running new cable, go with
Cat 5 or better, so that it'd be suitable for network use.



Re: CAT 3 with POTS drop?

> Is there any real advantage of using cat 3 for inside wiring for a DSL
> installation when the drop to the residence is only a POTS line?  The
> baud rate would be limited by the drop, I would imagine, but would the
> added CAT 3 (or better) make real difference with signal quality?
> Underground drops aren't readily replaced by phone companies around
> here.
>
> Thanks for replies!
> Greg
>
The reason the FCC recently required a minimum of Cat 3 is because of
numerous reports of crosstalk between multiple phones when traditional
quad-four wire is used. BTW EIA/TIA considers Cat 3 obsolete the minimum is
Cat 5e or Cat 6. Technically Cat 3 is fine for POTS.

I'd use TIA rated structured wiring for all new installations. As others
have posted if you are going to install new wiring use a whole house
POTS/DSL splitter to separate POTS from DSL near the Telco NID.

/Tom




Site Timeline