1. Home
  2. Ethernet LAN
  3. Need to extend an ethernet LAN over phone company wire less than mile
  4. Page 2

Need to extend an ethernet LAN over phone company wire less than mile

In many areas getting a dry copper pair is much harder than it used to be. There are FCC rules back by federal law regarding signal levels on copper phone pairs to limit interference. Back in the early days of broadband lots of folks "rolled their own" to get a connection to a remote office by ordering a dry copper pair and telling the phone company it was for an alarm circuit. Lots of hassles ensued for both the phone companies and the end users. An alarm circuit needs about 10 baud of signal ability so someone (back 10 years ago) might invest in $2000 of equipment and then 6 months later the phone company move them to another pair and things stop working and there be no hope of it ever working again. Remember the phone company was supplying a dry copper pair, not a DSL rated circuit.

I'd just stay away from that situation.

There are various options. I'm assuming you have power at each end? Can you get a line of site even if on top of a pole you own? Can you run a copper or fiber pair yourself?

There was a similar discussion on one of these news groups a year or so ago where someone was doing something similar. He lived up on a mountain and was about 1000' from a broad band internet connection. He ran copper by lying it on the ground knowing he'd have to replace it every 6 months to a year or so.

David

Reply to
DLR
Loading thread data ...

You still need your own physical pair of wires between the 2 locations, which is back to the initial problem to begin with... These "extenders" are designed for going across a local campus or private area where you control and have access to the wires deployed across the campus, plant, or school.

Reply to
ps56k

If you are already paying for dial-up connections in both places, perhaps switching to satellite internet would be a solution for the cams and give you (somewhat) improved internet access as a side- benefit.

Would cost $300-600 for equipment + $60-90 per month - for each site.

The practicality of that depends on many things, one of which is data thruput over 24 hours. Sat plans, though often faster, are very limited in total thruput allowed for the consumer accounts.

They also have lag issues, but I doubt that would come into play for cams.

Reply to
seaweedsl

Actually We tried Hughes Net on both ends and the camera techs never got it to work. The data went up okay and can be retrieved from dialup or DSL at any location, but having sattlelite links on both ends never worked. Harvey

Reply to
Harvey

Walter Roberson wrote: (snip)

Co-located may be the easy way, I believe all it requires is a digital line, such as ISDN. Primary rate ISDN (which is pretty much T1) holds about 23 voice calls at 56K (or 64K if no bits are stolen).

If you can get basic rate ISDN to both ends, you can send (usually) 128K bits/second through it.

-- glen

Reply to
glen herrmannsfeldt

I am trying a link to my new thread (if it works), click to go to

formatting link
there a better way to do a link to another thread? Harvey

Reply to
Harvey

Whoops, I'm a little remiss in answering posts this(last) month. Yes, the picture shows the front and back of the remote unit. The diagram at the bottom does the same, but shows how it functions. Yes, everybody, you need a pair, but it doesn't have to be dedicated. At

2000 feet, it will probably synch up at 25M.

Carl

Reply to
Carl Navarro

Oh, OK. I wonder what the problem is. I suspect it's something that having a fixed IP at the receiving end would solve.

Reply to
seaweedsl

Well, there is a fixed IP address at the server end. Why the receiving end? Harvey

Reply to
Harvey

I tried this today, and when I dialed, it wanted a username, password and IP address - none of which I had. The IP address that I have is for the camera scanner box, not the computer it is connected to. So do I need an IP address set for it too. I eventually got it to stop asking for a username and password but then I couldn't tell if anything was happening. I brought up a browser, but it couldn't connect to the IP address of the scanner (I didn't think it would - because I didn't know how to even tell if it was connected to the host computer. Then how to get it to connect to the LAN, I was lost.)

Harvey

Reply to
Harvey

Some detail: If you have a direct copper connection to the CO (central office), you'll up to about 48Kbits/sec download, and up to

33.6Kbits/sec with upload, depending on line condition, loading coils, bridged taps, and modem quality. However, if you have an SLC (subscriber line concentrator) or Pair Gain device, the best you can do is 28.8Kbit/sec.

I once scribbled some tests that can be done with a USR modem and the ATY11 command:

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

Depends.... There is streaming video and packetized video, and the streaming won't work on sat (even with the fixed ip's, probability is it wont, cuz of packets and latency)... If you are using the software that came with the camera's look to see if it is streaming or not, and maybe look at alternate software that is made to work on packetized links (microwave/sat/cell/etc).. Remember a sat at both ends does 2 latency laden/packetizations, and 4 latency laden transmissions.... 2 up and two down)....

Got the 1xrtt cell service there? (not as fast as evdo, but faster than dial-up)... FWIW in Rural northern Idaho we went with cell for security cameras (bonus, the cell phone worked real good too with the repeaters see

formatting link
to see if they would have stuff that would work for you we used the cae50 directional yagi pointed at cell tower and a omni for use in the house, and the kyocera routers/data cards Check out the kyocera kr1 and kr2 mobile routers at
formatting link

Reply to
Peter Pan

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.