[kwlug-disc] CAT6 - worthwhile?

Bob Jonkman bjonkman at sobac.com
Sat Oct 26 16:58:50 EDT 2013

Unsolicited wrote:
> no amount of devices on that wi-fi will ever saturate the gigabit - 
> wi-fi will never be that fast. (?)

Technology is not only more amazing than we imagine, it is more amazing
than we can imagine:


And then there's this:


So installing Gigibit cabling is definitely future-proofing.

For Chris, who asked if he should install a wallwart switch or pull new
cable:  Pull new cable.

If you're only using 100Mb/s devices now, then they only use two pairs
of wire in the cable.  It's possible to make a short-term cheat by
connecting the other two pairs to a second jack.  It'll cause some
cross-talk (which results in dropped packets) so this is not a cheat for
high-bandwidth applications.  Ironically, if the cable is CAT6 the pairs
are better separated, so this cheat works better with CAT6.  If you do
this, don't tell anyone. Especially network technicians.

Q: Will Gigabit Ethernet devices negotiate a Gigabit connection even
over CAT5 cable?  I don't know, but if you're using Gigabit devices at
both ends then all four pairs might be used and you'll need to find
another solution.


On 13-10-26 01:55 PM, John Van Ostrand wrote:>
> I see cat 6 being useful for a few things. Although I use wifi for
> my laptop most of the time when I want to move lots of data I want a 
> cable. The same goes for a PC which I still find useful. Access 
> points can use it and I'd rather run a cable than use a mesh. Not 
> only does a cable provide network it can provide power. I'd you have 
> to bring one cable to a device why not a dual purpose cable. 
> Videophiles might want less compression on their signal so might use 
> cat 6 to carry hdmi instead of running hdmi cable. Security devices 
> are a niche that still fits cabling ( though not generally cat6).
> One probably will soon be able to use wireless entirely on every 
> device for every reason. So call me old fashioned but a switched 
> network always runs better than a share media network. Why cat6? 
> Because if I'm running cable I go for price performance.
> As for the quality of the cable install, Badly installed cat6 ( like
>  a sharp bend radius) will have fewer failed packets than wifi and
> it won't have any collisions. Run you microwave and see if your
> tablet has wifi when your standing within ten feet of it.
> Both have usefulness.
> *From: *unsolicited
> *Sent: *Saturday, October 26, 2013 2:30 AM
> *To: *KWLUG discussion
> *Reply To: *KWLUG discussion
> *Subject: *Re: [kwlug-disc] CAT6 - worthwhile?
> OK, but my real basic question is, to what end?
> Gigabit has even now not permeated enough of the world. (Why any 
> laptop still comes with 10/100 is beyond me). Even my USB 3.0 / 
> gigabit adapter can't saturate the gigabit.
> Future proof for what (copper wise)?
> If the world is going tablets and phones - that's wifi, not copper. 
> Even if you have copper and an AP at each room for wi-fi devices to 
> connect to, no amount of devices on that wi-fi will ever saturate the
> gigabit - wi-fi will never be that fast. (?)
> Home wise, I'm not prepared to even put out for multi-run bonding - 
> the equipment required at each end is extraordinarily expensive (for
>  home). I don't imagine it's any different for 10Gps CAT6 ethernet, 
> let alone fibre. And if it's fibre we get to, the copper run, 5e or 
> 6, isn't going to be useful.
> So if most things can't saturate gigabit now, and fibre is going to 
> need another run anyways if we get there ... future proof for what 
> (sorts of beasties / media)?
> I'm not objecting to 6 over 5e, I just wonder ... for what? - 
> especially given the more expensive equipment required at each
> switch point, and the tighter bend and untwist limits for 6. I'd bet
> every home 6 installation breaks at each jack / switch / 5e
> device<->jack cable.
> If you've bent a cable, what, more than 30 degrees, or untwisted a 
> pair, or untwisted pairs more than 1/2 inch - you've just made using
>  cat 6 pointless.
> So my real question was ... what's coming that might need 6 over 5e?
> In house HD video distribution?
> On 13-10-25 04:57 PM, John Van Ostrand wrote:
>> Personally I think any new installation should use Cat 6. It's
>> only marginally more expensive than 5e but could future-proof your
>> house a little more. That said 5e will perform very well in a house
>>  since runs tend to be short and will work in cases where Cat 6 is
>> supposedly required. The way I look at it is that the time spend
>> installing is the the most expensive cost (even when done yourself)
>> so using a higher grade cable future-proofs so you can avoid
>> pulling everything out and re-doing cable. Sometimes I'll use 5e
>> jacks because those are easier to replace.
> . . .

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 263 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://kwlug.org/pipermail/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org/attachments/20131026/1871d1a5/attachment.bin>

More information about the kwlug-disc mailing list