[kwlug-disc] CAT6 - worthwhile? [Was: Re: Powerline networking - viable?]

[unsolicited]

Yep. Bought plenum rated when I started wiring this place, years ago.

So, conclusions for this thread:

- CAT6 cable does not a CAT6 network make. Every other join in the 
(home) line will typically break it. Or sharp bends in the cabling.

- plenum rated matters, at least in walls/ceilings.

- hard to work with factor may make choosing 5e over 6 reasonable. 
Especially if you know your device at that end will never run more than 
gigabit.

- nothing copper ever coming satisfied by 6 but not 5e. We'll be on 
fibre (meaning have to install another run), first. Mass use will drive 
fibre (connector) costs down faster than the never mass-use CAT6/10Gbps 
will ever go.

- for most / home, wall to device run will always be copper, not fibre. 
And not 10Gbps/CAT6 - so you've just broken your cat6 network. Not to 
say room to room runs won't be fibre eventually - which will break out 
to (multiple) copper at room entry. Even CAT6 patch cords won't matter
- your device won't be doing more than Gbps. [If that's not true, you'll 
know it, and quantify it - it won't be everything everywhere.]

- not to say don't run 6 if you're just starting, bearing in mind the 
above broken installation / PITA factor, but if you have some 5e lying 
around, use it.

- wi-fi is right out. (For 'terminals' - phones, tablets, internet use 
only computers, ok. 'Data carrying' [or video] ... wire it. Gigabit. 
Even with switches instead of multiple runs will be so superior to wi-fi 
that it's worth the aggravation.)


This is for home. Server rooms, different beastie. As is specific 
purpose room/location to location runs. Or provider runs to buildings.

If it's not fast enough, in the mean time (e.g.) - multiple runs to 
different switches. [Or dedicated links. e.g. 2nd NIC in two different 
storage/backup servers, different rooms, direct connected. Multiple runs 
and bonding even.]

Copper seldom saturated, even now - if it's not fast enough, other 
factors are limiting, not the copper. Be it need for special equipment 
at each end to bond/bridge, or ... see Cedric and latency.

CAT6 future proofing, in the general case - appears to be FUD.

If speed is an issue, it's going to be more readily / cheaply satisfied 
by multiple copper runs, not a single CAT6 run.


On 13-10-26 04:21 PM, Adam Glauser wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2013 1:55 AM, "unsolicited"<unsolicited at swiz.ca>  wrote:
>> In my case, most of the runs are via the forced air heat ducts. In the
> basement, the cables exit at a join / curve in the duct, where they go from
> vertical to horizontal (on their way to the furnace itself).
>
> I recall hearing at one point that the building code requires a special
> type of sheathing for cables run through ducts. Probably worth checking out
> if anyone plans on tacking a similar tack.