what tech?

what tech?

[urgrue]

this may be slightly off-topic, having nothing to do with linux but at 
least it has something to do with admining...
is there something like dsl, but cheaper, that would be appropriate for 
getting a connection along normal copper wires at relatively short 
distances (a few hundred meters at most?
just plain old ethernet is almost sufficient, but the distances im talking 
about would require slightly more, and it would be better if it didnt need 
two pairs of wire. speed is not important, even half a meg is okay.
dsl is too expensive for this purpose, and overkill anyway.

basically the point is to run connections through an apartment building. 
what would be appropriate?

Re: what tech?

[James]

On Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 01:46:47AM +0300, urgrue wrote:

| is there something like dsl, but cheaper, that would be appropriate for 
| getting a connection along normal copper wires at relatively short 
| distances (a few hundred meters at most?
| just plain old ethernet is almost sufficient, but the distances im talking 
| about would require slightly more, and it would be better if it didnt need 
| two pairs of wire. speed is not important, even half a meg is okay.
| dsl is too expensive for this purpose, and overkill anyway.
| 
| basically the point is to run connections through an apartment building. 
| what would be appropriate?

Well if it's through a building and not across open fields, etc then
ethernet is probably the cheapest. When you reach the 100-and-whatever
metre limit of cat5, just stick a cheap 2 port hub on the end, and
continue the wire for another 100m. And if speed's not important, a
10Mbit network will run further than a 100Mbit one with fewer errors.

This is probably how large offices cable themselves up.

And if you can push one wire through the wall, whatever, you can easily
push two (besides, a piece of cat5 isn't that thick, no thicker than
regular phone wire you'd be using for dsl, and it's fairly cheap too).

-- 
I will not encourage others to fly  
 
6AD6 865A BF6E 76BB 1FC2 | www.piku.org.uk/public-key.asc
E4C4 DEEA 7D08 D511 E149 | www.piku.org.uk wnzrf@cvxh.bet.hx (rot13'd)

Re: what tech?

[terry white]

on "4-28-2002" "urgrue" writ:

: along normal copper wires
  
... that , is going to be problematic. > 100M of copper wire is called
and antenna, and it will act like one.  which explains why cat-5 pairs
have different twist rates.  
    a better bet would be coax ethernet.  if i recall correctly, longer
runs possible using it.  i just checked, and 200M the limit.  this also
reduces the wirecount to one.
  
    further, i seem to recall a system that superimposed the data on the
power distribution system, and another that used existant phone lines.
from the sounds of it, neither of these applicable.  however, wireless
might be a way to go.  that, of course introduces security issues ...
  

-- 
... i'm a man, but i can change,
    if i have to , i guess ...

Re: what tech?

[James]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 06:09:00AM -0700, terry white wrote:
| on "4-28-2002" "urgrue" writ:
| 
| : along normal copper wires
|   
|     a better bet would be coax ethernet.  if i recall correctly, longer
| runs possible using it.  i just checked, and 200M the limit.  this also
| reduces the wirecount to one.

Coax would probably also be dirt cheap since coax-based networking is
old tech now :) (although its used a lot in CCTV systems) Just mind its
minimum bending radius when bending it round things, a broken piece of
coax is a nightmare.

|     further, i seem to recall a system that superimposed the data on
| the power distribution system, and another that used existant phone
| lines.

The power one would only work if everything was on the same phase and
didn't go through any UPSs or filters.

Never heard of the phone one (well, it's called 'dsl'...) but I've
heard of the opposite - running a phone line and network down one piece
of cat5.

| from the sounds of it, neither of these applicable.  however, wireless
| might be a way to go.  that, of course introduces security issues ...

It also has problems going through solid objects like concrete floors
and walls.

-- 
I will not carve gods  
 
6AD6 865A BF6E 76BB 1FC2 | www.piku.org.uk/public-key.asc
E4C4 DEEA 7D08 D511 E149 | www.piku.org.uk wnzrf@cvxh.bet.hx (rot13'd)

Re: what tech?

[Kyle]

  The old arc-net cards (about 1meg speed wise I
think) used to run on phone wire (even used the RJ11
jacks).  Each card had to either be terminated or
chained to another card.  You couldn't run a phone and
the network on the same cable though.  I can't count
the times the lan admin. used to come into my office
and ask if I'd been playing with the terminator again
:)  If you can find any of these cards they would
probably be less than dirt cheap... but I'm not sure
about the length restrictions.  I've run ethernet over
phone wire too..  stay at 10 meg and you might be able
to use existing phone lines (which are usually cat-3)
but once again you can't run the phone line on it at
the same time.

Kyle.


--- James <james@piku.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 06:09:00AM -0700, terry
> white wrote:
> | on "4-28-2002" "urgrue" writ:
> | 
> | : along normal copper wires
> |   
> |     a better bet would be coax ethernet.  if i
> recall correctly, longer
> | runs possible using it.  i just checked, and 200M
> the limit.  this also
> | reduces the wirecount to one.
> 
> Coax would probably also be dirt cheap since
> coax-based networking is
> old tech now :) (although its used a lot in CCTV
> systems) Just mind its
> minimum bending radius when bending it round things,
> a broken piece of
> coax is a nightmare.
> 
> |     further, i seem to recall a system that
> superimposed the data on
> | the power distribution system, and another that
> used existant phone
> | lines.
> 
> The power one would only work if everything was on
> the same phase and
> didn't go through any UPSs or filters.
> 
> Never heard of the phone one (well, it's called
> 'dsl'...) but I've
> heard of the opposite - running a phone line and
> network down one piece
> of cat5.
> 
> | from the sounds of it, neither of these
> applicable.  however, wireless
> | might be a way to go.  that, of course introduces
> security issues ...
> 
> It also has problems going through solid objects
> like concrete floors
> and walls.
> 
> -- 
> I will not carve gods  
>  
> 6AD6 865A BF6E 76BB 1FC2 |
> www.piku.org.uk/public-key.asc
> E4C4 DEEA 7D08 D511 E149 | www.piku.org.uk
> wnzrf@cvxh.bet.hx (rot13'd)
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
> "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at 
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com