100Mbit Fast Ethernet Bandwidth
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
Posted by Charles Turner on May 5, 2006, 7:56 am
Please log in for more thread options Hi, I am using CobraNet to transmit audio over 100Mbit Fast Ethernet. I'm aware of the limitations using CAT5 and multimode fibre, however I may need to run over other copper circuits. What is the minimum bandwidth required for 100Mbit Fast Ethernet to work correctly. Thanks, Charles | ||||
|
Posted by William P.N. Smith on May 5, 2006, 10:27 am
Please log in for more thread options Other copper circuits? What does that mean exactly? I beleive if you meet the specs of CAT5 you'll be guaranteed to carry 100BaseT (didn't someone prove Ethernet over a barbed wire fence?), anything less will be at the mercy of your patron saint, the equipment involved, and the phase of the moon. | ||||
|
Posted by Charles Turner on May 5, 2006, 11:41 am
Please log in for more thread options
Thanks, but I don't think you've grasped my point. If you transmit Fast Ethernet over copper, or anything else for that matter, with a bandwidth of 100MHz, then at the other end instead of a square wave, you will get a sine wave, which, I assume will not be acceptable. The bandwidth of the connection determines the risetime of the Ethernet 100MHz square wave (pulses) so the question is simple, what is the minimum bandwidth to achieve the correct risetime? Regards, Charles >>I am using CobraNet to transmit audio over 100Mbit Fast Ethernet. I'm
>>aware >>of the limitations using CAT5 and multimode fibre, however I may need to >>run >>over other copper circuits. >
> Other copper circuits? What does that mean exactly? I beleive if you > meet the specs of CAT5 you'll be guaranteed to carry 100BaseT (didn't > someone prove Ethernet over a barbed wire fence?), anything less will > be at the mercy of your patron saint, the equipment involved, and the > phase of the moon. | ||||
|
Posted by Walter Roberson on May 5, 2006, 12:15 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>Thanks, but I don't think you've grasped my point.
>If you transmit Fast Ethernet over copper, or anything else for that matter,
>with a bandwidth of 100MHz, then at the other end instead of a square wave, >you will get a sine wave, which, I assume will not be acceptable. Well, in the sense that any waveform can be represented as the sum of sine waves... What you would get instead of a square wave would be the sum of the component sine waves in the frequency range transportable along the wire. That is not going to be a sine wave unless you were using a very low bandwidth transport that was acting as a filter. >The bandwidth of the connection determines the risetime of the Ethernet
>100MHz square wave (pulses) so the question is simple, what is the minimum >bandwidth to achieve the correct risetime? http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.3-2002.pdf | ||||
|
Posted by glen herrmannsfeldt on May 5, 2006, 12:34 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> Thanks, but I don't think you've grasped my point.
> If you transmit Fast Ethernet over copper, or anything else for that
> matter, with a bandwidth of 100MHz, then at the other end instead of > a square wave, you will get a sine wave, which, I assume will > not be acceptable. For most communications systems the signal at the far end is usually much closer to sine than square. That comes out naturally if you want to use most of the available bandwidth. > The bandwidth of the connection determines the risetime of the Ethernet
> 100MHz square wave (pulses) so the question is simple, what is the minimum > bandwidth to achieve the correct risetime? A 100MHz sine will go through a 100MHz cable and come out looking like a sine at the other end. If you want it to look more square, the next harmonic is 300MHz, and even with that, it will still not look very square. Even more, for UTP systems keeping the harmonics down is an important part of keeping RFI within limits. Always remember that the signal is in the sidebands, not in the carrier. -- glen | ||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| 100Mbit Fast Ethernet Bandwidth | May 5, 2006, 7:56 am |
| Bandwidth Ideal Solutions For Bandwidth Hungry Companies | June 12, 2007, 11:28 pm |
| Is Gigabit Ethernet (GigE) A Good Choice For Business Bandwidth? | April 24, 2007, 8:03 pm |
| Is Gigabit Ethernet (GigE) A Good Choice For Business Bandwidth? | April 24, 2007, 8:44 pm |
| Is Gigabit Ethernet (GigE) A Good Choice For Business Bandwidth? | April 25, 2007, 8:51 pm |
| Fast ethernet switching | February 22, 2007, 10:48 am |
| Speed limit of Fast Ethernet | November 22, 2005, 7:39 am |
| FDDI to Fast Ethernet "Bridge" Available? | October 1, 2008, 11:38 pm |
| FDDI to Fast Ethernet "Bridge"? | October 1, 2008, 11:42 pm |
| Direct connect Gigabit/Fast Ethernet | March 14, 2006, 9:43 pm |
| Safe.com 8 Port 10/100Mbs Fast Ethernet Switch | February 13, 2005, 12:49 pm |
| Splitting of physical line possible for 100Mbit/s | October 22, 2006, 6:58 pm |
| Switch Uplink & bandwidth question | January 8, 2005, 2:55 pm |
| vlans - monitoring bandwidth utliization | August 19, 2006, 6:29 pm |
| [URGENT]: Cal. Buffer Size based on User i/p Bandwidth In 1Gbps 802.3 | June 30, 2008, 1:05 am |
>of the limitations using CAT5 and multimode fibre, however I may need to run
>over other copper circuits.