Post by thread:[EE]: 4 wires to make a net cable with j45?

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE]: 4 wires to make a net cable with j45?'
2002\07\09@214608 by personal

does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make net cable with j45 connector? 1-3 2-6 cross over,,,,,for pc to pc... no other pin needed right? BR, -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email spam_OUTlistservTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\07\10@024616 by Robert Rolf

No, but it's 1-2 & 3-6 pairs cross to 3-6 & 1-2 personal wrote: > > does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make > net cable with j45 connector? > > 1-3 2-6 cross over,,,,,for pc to pc... > > no other pin needed right? > > BR, > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email .....listservKILLspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\10@075426 by Olin Lathrop

> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make > net cable with j45 connector? Yes, I'm sure many people do. ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList .....piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspam.....mitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\10@102259 by Russell McMahon

Judging from your email address, English may not be your 1st language. If so, you've done well. Judging from at least one reply, not everyone is doing as good a job as they might have of translating a reasonable request into English (even though they may live in a country where English of a sort is their first language). So, let's see if I can translate your request into something that such people may understand :-) (I may get this wrong). > does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make > net cable with j45 connector? > 1-3 2-6 cross over,,,,,for PC to PC... > no other pin needed right? _______________________ TRANSLATION (perhaps): I am not just asking this question blindly without having done some research of my own first but I now have a question which is not obvious to me. I have done some research into UTP network cables and found out what plugs are used and what wires appear to be used. From my research I have determined that for a "crossover" cable between two PCs without a hub or switch, at one end the pair on pins 1 & 2 is connected to the wires that go to pins 3 & 6 at the other end. The same "swap" is performed in the other direction. While it seems logical to me that using just these wires should be enough there MAY be some other aspect that I am not familiar with that makes it desirable or necessary to connect the other pins as well. As I have not found this mentioned elsewhere I have decided to ask the PICList members' advice. I have not asked list members by private email as, although some don't mind at all, I know some don't seem to appreciate this. I have not used very many words in this request as constructing any message in English is somewhat time consuming for me so I tried to make my request as concise as I could. _________________ Hopefully the above "translation" will allow people who use English as a first language and whose minds are not perhaps flexible enough to cope with reasonable requests from those who do not have English as a first language to understand and answer the question. For what it's worth, my understanding on this is as follows: A UTP network cable may be made using only two pairs of wires. One twisted pair should connect to pins 1 & 2. The other should connect to pins 3 & 6. Where the cable is to be used to connect a PC to a network hub the following connections should be used. 1 - 1 2 - 2 3 - 3 6 - 6 Where the cable is to be used to connect from PC to PC without a hub a "crossover" cable should be used where the transmit pair in one direction is connected to the receive pins at the other end. ie 1 - 3 2 - 6 3 - 1 6 - 2 If you do have extra pairs in the cable they SHOULD be terminated according to the published standards (available on net) as if they are left floating they can cause problems with data corruption. So, yes - your research and assumptions were correct although, as Robert Rolf's good answer points out, it is possible to confuse what you meant when you wrote the numbers. What he said and what you said about connection numbering was correct (probably) but it was possible to get the wrong idea when reading them. Hopefully the "explicit" connection information above makes the connections clear. If not, ask again - there are no silly well researched questions on the PICList (they tell me) - just ones which may be misunderstood if people don't try a little to understand them. Russell McMahon -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\10@122846 by Brendan Moran

An excellent answer, Russell, I, however, in general like to point to useful links. Mike, you are, in general, correct. However, you have not mentioned whether you are running 10base-T or 100base-T4. Here is what I found with a quick google: http://www.pin-outs.com/datasheet_72.html RJ45 Cross Over Cable RJ45 Male RJ45 Male 1 3 2 6 3 1 6 2 And these two links show the actual pin descriptions for 10/100base-T http://www.pin-outs.com/datasheet_22.html http://www.pin-outs.com/datasheet_92.htm Hope that helps, --Brendan > Judging from your email address, English may not be your 1st language. If > so, you've done well. > > Judging from at least one reply, not everyone is doing as good a job as they > might have of translating a reasonable request into English (even though > they may live in a country where English of a sort is their first language). {Quote hidden}> > So, let's see if I can translate your request into something that such > people may understand :-) > (I may get this wrong). > > > does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make > > net cable with j45 connector? > > 1-3 2-6 cross over,,,,,for PC to PC... > > no other pin needed right? > > _______________________ > TRANSLATION (perhaps): I am not just asking this question blindly > without having done some research of my own first but I now have a question > which is not obvious to me. I have done some research into UTP network > cables and found out what plugs are used and what wires appear to be used. > >From my research I have determined that for a "crossover" cable between two > PCs without a hub or switch, at one end the pair on pins 1 & 2 is connected > to the wires that go to pins 3 & 6 at the other end. The same "swap" is > performed in the other direction. While it seems logical to me that using > just these wires should be enough there MAY be some other aspect that I am > not familiar with that makes it desirable or necessary to connect the other > pins as well. As I have not found this mentioned elsewhere I have decided to > ask the PICList members' advice. I have not asked list members by private > email as, although some don't mind at all, I know some don't seem to > appreciate this. I have not used very many words in this request as > constructing any message in English is somewhat time consuming for me so I > tried to make my request as concise as I could. > _________________ > > Hopefully the above "translation" will allow people who use English as a > first language and whose minds are not perhaps flexible enough to cope with > reasonable requests from those who do not have English as a first language > to understand and answer the question. > > For what it's worth, my understanding on this is as follows: > A UTP network cable may be made using only two pairs of wires. > One twisted pair should connect to pins 1 & 2. The other should connect to > pins 3 & 6. > Where the cable is to be used to connect a PC to a network hub the following > connections should be used. > > 1 - 1 > 2 - 2 > 3 - 3 > 6 - 6 > > Where the cable is to be used to connect from PC to PC without a hub a > "crossover" cable should be used where the transmit pair in one direction is > connected to the receive pins at the other end. > ie > > 1 - 3 > 2 - 6 > 3 - 1 > 6 - 2 > > If you do have extra pairs in the cable they SHOULD be terminated according > to the published standards (available on net) as if they are left floating > they can cause problems with data corruption. > > So, yes - your research and assumptions were correct although, as Robert > Rolf's good answer points out, it is possible to confuse what you meant when > you wrote the numbers. What he said and what you said about connection > numbering was correct (probably) but it was possible to get the wrong idea > when reading them. Hopefully the "explicit" connection information above > makes the connections clear. If not, ask again - there are no silly well > researched questions on the PICList (they tell me) - just ones which may be > misunderstood if people don't try a little to understand them. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList piclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\10@171323 by Peter L. Peres

>> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make >> net cable with j45 connector? Why would you want to do it yourself ? The cost of a proper crimp tool alone will set you back more than buying ready-made cables and splicing them if required. Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList @spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\10@191806 by Herbert Graf

> >> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make > >> net cable with j45 connector? > > Why would you want to do it yourself ? The cost of a proper crimp tool > alone will set you back more than buying ready-made cables and splicing > them if required. Huh? I'm not sure where you got that idea from. I bought a perfectly good crimper for < $20 CND (~$13 US), can't buy many ready made cables for $20, also can't fish a ready made cable through a hole barely big enough for the cable. TTYL -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList KILLspampiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\10@215200 by Bob Blick

Usually it works. However it will not always work. It does not work between my laptop(with 3com 10mbps card) and i810 BookPC(onboard 100mbps). I needed a crossover with all 8 wires(extra 4 wires straight through). Note the 3com card has an 8 pin x-jack, with 6 wires on the jack, not 4 or 8! The extra wires go somewhere. The link light goes on with 4 wires, but nothing else would work. Perhaps the 4 wire approach would work if the two computers shared ground. Cheers, Bob On 9 Jul 2002 at 21:46, personal wrote: {Quote hidden}> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make > net cable with j45 connector? > > 1-3 2-6 cross over,,,,,for pc to pc... > > no other pin needed right? > > BR, > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email RemoveMElistservTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body > > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\11@130335 by Brendan Moran

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Usually it works. However it will not always work. It does not work > between my laptop(with 3com 10mbps card) and i810 > BookPC(onboard 100mbps). I needed a crossover with all 8 > wires(extra 4 wires straight through). > > Note the 3com card has an 8 pin x-jack, with 6 wires on the jack, > not 4 or 8! The extra wires go somewhere. I suscpet that that was just an issue with a not terribly compliant 10/100 ethernet card. > The link light goes on with 4 wires, but nothing else would work. 4 wires is all you need if you have 10Mbps at each end. > Perhaps the 4 wire approach would work if the two computers > shared ground. As far as I know, ethernet is a differential protocol for the express purpose of avoiding the issues involved with shared grounds. The grounds shouldn't matter. - --Brendan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBPS258QVk8xtQuK+BEQKwgACgqHWPiOqiP+ttYtuo96a9SR1MxIIAnR9s U3C455BQGgYa7HZdmIiILAHK =oykB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@144023 by Diego Sierra

Hi! > > >> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make net cable with j45 connector? Yes, you can use it for 10 or 100 Mbps ethernet. You have to connect the cable using pairs 1-2 and 3-6 (this means a twisted pair of cables is connected to 1-2 and another twisted pair to 3-6). The other two pairs available (4-5 and 7-8) are used in Gigabit Ethernet or ATM over copper, for example. Normal cable (computer to hub): 1---\ /---1 TWISTED 2---/ \---2 3---\ /---3 TWISTED 6---/ \---6 Crossed cable (computer to computer): 1---\ /---3 TWISTED 2---/ \---6 3---\ /---1 TWISTED 6---/ \---2 Bye, Diego. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@145301 by Brendan Moran

> Yes, you can use it for 10 or 100 Mbps ethernet. No, Emphatic no. > You have to connect the cable using pairs 1-2 and 3-6 (this means a twisted > pair of cables is connected to 1-2 and another twisted pair to 3-6). The > other two pairs available (4-5 and 7-8) are used in Gigabit Ethernet or ATM > over copper, for example. Please read the links fin my previous post. The 4 additional lines are clearly for 100Mbps. Gigabit lan takes an additional 4 pairs. Or at least that's what all the info I've seen states. --Brendan -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@160324 by Phillip Vogel

Well, you can be as emphatic as you want to be, but there are plenty of 10 and 100 Mbps ethernets running on two pairs (much of mine included). P. > {Original Message removed}

2002\07\11@162027 by Brendan Moran

> Well, you can be as emphatic as you want to be, but there are plenty of 10 > and 100 Mbps ethernets running on two pairs (much of mine included). I'll start by assuming you're correct, because now, I am truly confused. Well, after some checking, I have found an answer. We're both right. 100base-T4 is 4 pair telephone cable, while 100base-TX (which I assume you're using) is 2 pair data grade cable. This information: "In 100 Mbps (megabits per second) Ethernet (known as Fast Ethernet), there are three types of physical wiring that can carry signals: 100BASE-T4 (four pairs of telephone twisted pair wire) 100BASE-TX (two pairs of data grade twisted-pair wire) 100BASE-FX (a two-strand optical fiber cable) " was found at http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci211490,00.html Well, good to have cleared that up. --Brendan -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@162041 by Diego Sierra

Hi! > > Yes, you can use it for 10 or 100 Mbps ethernet. > > No, Emphatic no. Yes you can, IF you use a CAT5 cable. If you use a CAT3 cable, 100Mbps ethernet needed the 4 pairs. This is due to the higher frequencies of the 100Mbps related to the 10Mbps. Cheers, Diego. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@162752 by Bob Blick

> > Please read the links fin my previous post. The 4 additional lines are > clearly for 100Mbps. Gigabit lan takes an additional 4 pairs. > 100 base T4 require 8 wires, but that is not what most people use. Most people have 10/100 cards that only need 4 wires. Except when they have a quirky card that likes a few extra. 100 base T4 is not compatible with 100 base T and requires special hubs and switches. It is not very popular, although sometimes you can get good deals on it. It is more than twice as fast as 100 base T but is usually not worth the expense, hassle, and incompatibility. -Bob -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@162759 by Herbert Graf

> > You have to connect the cable using pairs 1-2 and 3-6 (this means a > twisted > > pair of cables is connected to 1-2 and another twisted pair to 3-6). The > > other two pairs available (4-5 and 7-8) are used in Gigabit Ethernet or > ATM > > over copper, for example. > > Please read the links fin my previous post. The 4 additional lines are > clearly for 100Mbps. Yes, if using CAT3, for CAT5 cable only two pairs are necessary for 100Mbps. TTYL -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@163711 by Chris Carbaugh

I see Brendan already answered this before I got to hit send, but here it is anyhow..... 10 and 100Mbps ethernet uses pairs 2 and 3, (pins 1,2 -orange- and 3,6 -green- respectively). Pairs 1 and 4 (pins 4,5 -blue- and 7,8 -brown-) are not used. In fact, I have come across patch panels and jacks manufactured by Amp that don't even conduct pairs 1 and 4. These were even labeled as CAT5, when clearly they are not (the CAT5 spec requires all conductors). 1000Mbps ethernet (from what I've read, I have no experience with it personally) uses all 4 pairs. I believe in a parallel fashion (2 pairs send/receive half the data, the other two send/receive the other half). In fact, since this thread started off about a crossover cable, field crimped patch cables do not meet EIA/TIA 568B spec, not that anyone cares. The links posted by Brendan (I believe) do show the correct pin outs, but I didn't look to see whether they stated what pins/conductors actually do. I believe in 10/100 ethernet it is as follows: pin 1: + transmit pin 2: - transmit pin 3: + receive pin 6: - receive in 1000 ethernet, a second 'channel' is added: pin 4: + transmit pin 5: - transmit pin 7: + receive pin 8: - receive I recently attended a BICSI level one installer course for structered cabling installation. We had a rather lengthy discussion on the manner the pins are laid out in ethernet, and apparently, that is something only the manufacturers of LAN equipment can answer. Chris On Thu, 2002-07-11 at 14:52, Brendan Moran wrote: {Quote hidden}> > Yes, you can use it for 10 or 100 Mbps ethernet. > > No, Emphatic no. > > > You have to connect the cable using pairs 1-2 and 3-6 (this means a > twisted > > pair of cables is connected to 1-2 and another twisted pair to 3-6). The > > other two pairs available (4-5 and 7-8) are used in Gigabit Ethernet or > ATM > > over copper, for example. > > Please read the links fin my previous post. The 4 additional lines are > clearly for 100Mbps. Gigabit lan takes an additional 4 pairs. > > Or at least that's what all the info I've seen states. > > --Brendan > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: > [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads > > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@183759 by Bob Ammerman

Note athat about 99.999% of copper 100MBethernet is 100base-TX. Basically 100base-T4 was an early experiment that more or less flopped. Bob Ammerman RAm Systems {Original Message removed}

2002\07\11@185024 by Phillip Vogel

Oh, I bet you could add a couple of more nines to that percentage. Certainly with anything installed in the last several years. P. > {Original Message removed}

2002\07\11@185439 by Brendan Moran

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 How's 100base-FX doing? > Note athat about 99.999% of copper 100MBethernet is 100base-TX. > Basically 100base-T4 was an early experiment that more or less > flopped. - --Brendan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBPS4MXAVk8xtQuK+BEQJyEwCdGHsltKSKFVuIbcyhGVRQqv5+8KgAn0r1 oaaZ/ebEUFmk65kSKFiysK6y =4orS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\11@191341 by Bob Ammerman

I have one customer that was using it for a while for their network "backbone" connections, but now uses the same fiber to carry gigabit. Bob Ammerman RAm Systems {Original Message removed}

2002\07\11@223543 by Herbert Graf

AFAIK not that bad, it was used alot for backbone connections between routers, these days most of it is giga-bit, but alot is still 100Base-FX. TTYL > How's 100base-FX doing? > > > Note athat about 99.999% of copper 100MBethernet is 100base-TX. > > Basically 100base-T4 was an early experiment that more or less > > flopped. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2002\07\12@005318 by SM Ling

> Well, you can be as emphatic as you want to be, but there are plenty of 10 > and 100 Mbps ethernets running on two pairs (much of mine included). > > P. I don't have much installation examples, just this one: I ran a 4-wire telephone cable to network my wife computer of another room to mine. Microsoft peer-to-peer network flawlessly. Yes, it is on 10baseTx 10/100. But still have not achieved the objective of getting her off my computer because 98SE Internet Commection Sharing is not working. Tried a few times, and comb through the internet for examples, but still does not work. At least she is crashing my system as often now. Cheers, Ling SM -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@020436 by Russell McMahon

You can get a free proxy server from http://www.analogx.com which is extremely good for basic internet use (eg browser & pop3 email) but somewhat lacking for some services such as ICQ. They tell you on site what its limitations are. I have been using it quite happily but have just changed back to Internet Connection Sharing so that my son can play "Never Winter Nights" over my ADSL link. Analogx proxy didn't let him do so. RM > I don't have much installation examples, just this one: I ran a 4-wire > telephone cable to network my wife computer of another room to mine. > Microsoft peer-to-peer network flawlessly. Yes, it is on 10baseTx 10/100. > > But still have not achieved the objective of getting her off my computer > because 98SE Internet Commection Sharing is not working. Tried a few times, {Quote hidden}> and comb through the internet for examples, but still does not work. At > least she is crashing my system as often now. > > Cheers, Ling SM > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics > (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics > > > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@035942 by Peter L. Peres

On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Herbert Graf wrote: >> >> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make >> >> net cable with j45 connector? >> >> Why would you want to do it yourself ? The cost of a proper crimp tool >> alone will set you back more than buying ready-made cables and splicing >> them if required. > >Huh? I'm not sure where you got that idea from. I bought a perfectly good >crimper for < $20 CND (~$13 US), can't buy many ready made cables for $20, >also can't fish a ready made cable through a hole barely big enough for the >cable. TTYL You're in Canada, I'm not... As to the hole, you will be sorry later imho ;-) (been there). Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@042738 by Alan B. Pearce

>I see Brendan already answered this before I got to hit >send, but here it is anyhow..... same here >In fact, since this thread started off about a crossover >cable, field crimped patch cables do not meet EIA/TIA >568B spec, not that anyone cares. Not sure why you think this, any well made cable should meet the specs provided that the length between the crimp point and the twist is not too long. This is where most people mess things up in my experience, trying to get the individual wires into the connector. {Quote hidden}>The links posted by Brendan (I believe) do show the >correct pin outs, but I didn't look to see whether >they stated what pins/conductors actually do. >I believe in 10/100 ethernet it is as follows: >pin 1: + transmit >pin 2: - transmit >pin 3: + receive >pin 6: - receive >in 1000 ethernet, a second 'channel' is added: >pin 4: + transmit >pin 5: - transmit >pin 7: + receive >pin 8: - receive I believe that what is listed here for 1GB e-net is the same as required for the 100-T4 wiring. The 100-T4 was an early attempt to corner the 100MB market IIRC, and founded because the 100-TX system had the advantage that it was compatable with the 10MB system, allowing the automatic 10/100 operation by autosensing hubs. This left the 100-T4 system as an orphan. >I recently attended a BICSI level one installer course for >structered cabling installation. We had a rather lengthy >discussion on the manner the pins are laid out in ethernet, >and apparently, that is something only the manufacturers of >LAN equipment can answer. My understanding is that this pin layout method goes back to the telephone heritage of the cabling system. The very centre pair of wires is what is used for a normal analogue telephone to connect to the exchange. The next pair out (as in one wire each side of the centre pair) are used as the second circuit for 4-wire modem connections. I am in the dark on the expansion beyond that, but suspect that they were chosen to minimise equipment destruction if a network card is plugged into the telephone network :) I am happy to have corrections to this understanding :)) -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@092447 by Chris Carbaugh

On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 04:27, Alan B. Pearce wrote: -snip- > >In fact, since this thread started off about a crossover > >cable, field crimped patch cables do not meet EIA/TIA > >568B spec, not that anyone cares. > > Not sure why you think this, any well made cable should meet the specs > provided that the length between the crimp point and the twist is not too > long. This is where most people mess things up in my experience, trying to > get the individual wires into the connector. -snip- I agree with you completely. With a little practice, it is quite easy to produce a crimp that looks identical to something factory produced. I think my wording was off a bit, while a field crimped RJ45 will in fact meet the specs technically, it is not -approved- by the standards body. I have not found any documentation on this, this came from the instructor at the BICSI course I attended. He has more experience in the telcom field than I have experience breathing :) Chris -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@093536 by Herbert Graf

> >> >> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make > >> >> net cable with j45 connector? > >> > >> Why would you want to do it yourself ? The cost of a proper crimp tool > >> alone will set you back more than buying ready-made cables and splicing > >> them if required. > > > >Huh? I'm not sure where you got that idea from. I bought a perfectly good > >crimper for < $20 CND (~$13 US), can't buy many ready made > cables for $20, > >also can't fish a ready made cable through a hole barely big > enough for the > >cable. TTYL > > You're in Canada, I'm not... True, but there are several online sources that have them for nearly the same price. > As to the hole, you will be sorry later imho ;-) (been there). I don't see why you'd say that, it's been there for around 4 years now and hasn't given me one problem. If you feel like it's necessary to drill a 1/2" hole instead of a 1/4" hole (I only have a 1/4" bit long enough to get through the wall) through over 1 foot of steel reinforced concrete be my guest. If you feel like buying ready made cable so be it, I've done ALOT of connected with my trusty crimper and the only problems I've ever had were due to my connecting the wrong wires. TTYL -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@095727 by Dale Botkin

Of course Linux with iptables, or BSD/Solaris with IPF will get you a very nice NAT/firewall/proxy system, if you've got a little time to invest. Dale -- "Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly." - Arnold Edinborough On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Russell McMahon wrote: > You can get a free proxy server from http://www.analogx.com which is extremely good > for basic internet use (eg browser & pop3 email) but somewhat lacking for > some services such as ICQ. They tell you on site what its limitations are. I > have been using it quite happily but have just changed back to Internet > Connection Sharing so that my son can play "Never Winter Nights" over my > ADSL link. Analogx proxy didn't let him do so. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@121010 by Brendan Moran

That's one of my pet projects right now. Still have to get it going though. --Brendan > Of course Linux with iptables, or BSD/Solaris with IPF will get you a very > nice NAT/firewall/proxy system, if you've got a little time to invest. > > Dale > -- > "Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that > curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly." > - Arnold Edinborough -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@121812 by Herbert Graf

I use http://www.coyotelinux.com, it's a single floppy distro that turns any computer with two NICs into a router. Minimum requirements are something like 386 with 12MB of memory and a floppy drive, most people have machines like that lying around in the basement. TTYL e > That's one of my pet projects right now. Still have to get it > going though. > > --Brendan > > > Of course Linux with iptables, or BSD/Solaris with IPF will get > you a very > > nice NAT/firewall/proxy system, if you've got a little time to invest. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@124722 by Peter L. Peres

On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Herbert Graf wrote: {Quote hidden}>> >> >> does any one know, can I only use 4 wires to make >> >> >> net cable with j45 connector? >> >> >> >> Why would you want to do it yourself ? The cost of a proper crimp tool >> >> alone will set you back more than buying ready-made cables and splicing >> >> them if required. >> > >> >Huh? I'm not sure where you got that idea from. I bought a perfectly good >> >crimper for < $20 CND (~$13 US), can't buy many ready made >> cables for $20, >> >also can't fish a ready made cable through a hole barely big >> enough for the >> >cable. TTYL >> >> You're in Canada, I'm not... > > True, but there are several online sources that have them for nearly the >same price. > >> As to the hole, you will be sorry later imho ;-) (been there). > > I don't see why you'd say that, it's been there for around 4 >years now and hasn't given me one problem. If you feel like it's >necessary to drill a 1/2" hole instead of a 1/4" hole (I only have a 1/4" >bit long enough to get through the wall) through over 1 foot of steel >reinforced concrete be my guest. If you feel like buying ready made cable >so be it, I've done ALOT of connected with my trusty crimper and the only >problems I've ever had were due to my connecting the wrong wires. TTYL What are you wiring up, an army shelter ?! Usually there are softer (thinner) parts you can drill through. Also the drilling is done with the standard 1/2" or 3/4" (for conduit) bit used by electricians everywhere (?). You can rent/borrow/hire such a guy or just the tool anywhere. Try your building's janitor if you have one. I've never seen a 1/4" bit over 1' long since you're mentioning it. It would break very easily I think. You should not drill ANY holes through structural elements without consulting an engineer qualified to advise about that structure. The problems occur when someone (possibly you) shifts something heavy and neatly cuts the cable. Since the cable is captive you can now start over. Also, it is impossible to swap another cable for the existing one for testing purposes and fiddling the cable through such a long small hole (it tends to fill with debris from drywalls and finishings) is not fun. Of course you do as you like. Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@201918 by Dwayne Reid

At 05:48 PM 7/12/02 +0300, Peter L. Peres wrote: >On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Herbert Graf wrote: > > >necessary to drill a 1/2" hole instead of a 1/4" hole (I only have a 1/4" > >bit long enough to get through the wall) through over 1 foot of steel > >reinforced concrete be my guest. If you feel like buying ready made cable > >What are you wiring up, an army shelter ?! Usually there are softer >(thinner) parts you can drill through. I don't know about Herbert's situation, but here in Edmonton, a *lot* of high rise condo buildings are made entirely of concrete. There are *no* wood studs in the apartment at all. Floor and ceiling are concrete as well. Fishing wires between rooms requires drilling through the concrete wall. I've done this for friends - a good metal detector is essential to make sure that you miss any rebar that in the vicinity. But the smallest hole I drilled through those walls was 1/2" - I haven't seen an 18" long bit smaller than that strong enough to survive my hammer drill. Hanging speakers or a TV requires drilling into the concrete wall. A small bit is OK for the anchors that I use - 1/4" or 5/16". But those bits are nice and short. dwayne -- Dwayne Reid <TakeThisOuTdwaynerEraseMEspam_OUTplanet.eon.net> Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd Edmonton, AB, CANADA (780) 489-3199 voice (780) 487-6397 fax Celebrating 18 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2002) .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .- `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address. This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@232450 by Herbert Graf

> At 05:48 PM 7/12/02 +0300, Peter L. Peres wrote: > >On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Herbert Graf wrote: > > > > >necessary to drill a 1/2" hole instead of a 1/4" hole (I only > have a 1/4" > > >bit long enough to get through the wall) through over 1 foot of steel > > >reinforced concrete be my guest. If you feel like buying ready > made cable > > > >What are you wiring up, an army shelter ?! Usually there are softer > >(thinner) parts you can drill through. > > I don't know about Herbert's situation, but here in Edmonton, a *lot* of > high rise condo buildings are made entirely of concrete. There are *no* > wood studs in the apartment at all. Floor and ceiling are > concrete as well. You are correct, I'm in Toronto and live in a building that is built the same. It is all solid concrete, most of the walls are relatively thin (around 2 inches), but the wall between my room and the living room is a structural wall and is about 12" think, steel reinforced. > Fishing wires between rooms requires drilling through the concrete > wall. I've done this for friends - a good metal detector is essential to > make sure that you miss any rebar that in the vicinity. But the smallest > hole I drilled through those walls was 1/2" - I haven't seen an 18" long > bit smaller than that strong enough to survive my hammer drill. Hehe, never had a metal detector, just kept drilling until I got through, I usually get through on the first try, every once in a while it takes two tries. BTW I was wrong, the bit I use is actually 5/16" (just slightly bigger then 1/2") and is only 16" long. It is a standard Mastercraft bit (about 10 years old, and it shows, it says: Make in West Germany!). Have drilled quite a few holes with it. I can't imagine how hard it would be to get a 1/2" bit through, I get quite a sweat pushing the hammer drill through the wall with this bit. TTYL -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\13@071459 by Peter L. Peres

On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Herbert Graf wrote: > Hehe, never had a metal detector, just kept drilling until I got through, I >usually get through on the first try, every once in a while it takes two >tries. BTW I was wrong, the bit I use is actually 5/16" (just slightly >bigger then 1/2") and is only 16" long. It is a standard Mastercraft bit >(about 10 years old, and it shows, it says: Make in West Germany!). Have >drilled quite a few holes with it. I can't imagine how hard it would be to >get a 1/2" bit through, I get quite a sweat pushing the hammer drill through >the wall with this bit. TTYL Hehe you're lucky your builder hasn't put any utility channels in or adjacent to the structural wall's profile (very common) (or at least you haven't found them yet). Imho get a metal detector ... drilling through a mains power distribution cable or the phone cable trunk that supports all the floors above yours is very spectacular in results. Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@162109 by Herbert Graf

> > Hehe, never had a metal detector, just kept drilling > until I got through, I > >usually get through on the first try, every once in a while it takes two > >tries. BTW I was wrong, the bit I use is actually 5/16" (just slightly > >bigger then 1/2") and is only 16" long. It is a standard Mastercraft bit > >(about 10 years old, and it shows, it says: Make in West Germany!). Have > >drilled quite a few holes with it. I can't imagine how hard it > would be to > >get a 1/2" bit through, I get quite a sweat pushing the hammer > drill through > >the wall with this bit. TTYL > > Hehe you're lucky your builder hasn't put any utility channels in or > adjacent to the structural wall's profile (very common) (or at least you > haven't found them yet). Imho get a metal detector ... drilling through a > mains power distribution cable or the phone cable trunk that supports all > the floors above yours is very spectacular in results. Actually it's not a problem, the bit I use is a pure masonary bit, the feeling of concrete and steel is VERY different with this bit, you could spend an hour and still not get through a piece of rebar with it. It's pretty obvious when you hit metal. Aside from that there ARE no power feeds in the walls I'm talking about, there are vertical raceways that carries all the power and telephone lines. The only thing in these walls is rebar (no light switches or outlets are located on these walls). Water is carried along it's own vertical raceway nearer to the inside of the building. I don't see how useful a metal detector would be in my case, it would have to be pretty damn sensitive to pinpoint, within about 1/2", a piece of rebar embedded more than 6" in solid concrete. TTYL -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2002 , 2003 only
- Today
- New search...