🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.dcom.lans.misc
Article #329

Re: building wiring

#329
From: John K. Scoggin, Jr.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:53
58 lines
3369 bytes
In article 9AF@ra.nrl.navy.mil, atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson) writes:
> [ redirected discussion from comp.protocols.tcp-ip :-]
> 
> In article <1993Jan24.231044.16138@xenitec.on.ca> merce@xenitec.on.ca (Jim Mercer) writes:
> 
> >for new buildings, [coax is] dead, except for the possibiliy of backbone 
> >pulls of thick coax to connect wiring centres, but then you might consider 
> >fiber.
> 
>   Actually, I happen to be planning for a 1995 building and we are
> sure that our backbones will be fiber.  However, we expect to continue
> to have a large installed base of workstations that want a thin-net
> Ethernet coax connection and do not plan that twisted pair will be
> enough.
> 
>   The harder question is which kind of fiber to install.  So our
> backbone plans have both single-mode and multi-mode fiber.  The
> distribution within the floors will be decided upon later so we have
> time to figure out what we want.
> 
> >for existing buildings, if you are pulling new cable, pull UTP.  you
> >will probably save some money on media.  you will spend it later in hubs.
> 
>   Actually most of the cost of cabling installation is in the labor,
> so it would be much wiser to put in Shielded Twisted Pair (STP), with
> 2 pair of wires per outlet.  NB: Anything that will run over UTP will
> also run over STP, but the reverse is NOT true.  STP is wisest and
> gives the most flexibility, with little real cost difference from UTP
> when you figure in installation costs.
> 

This is NOT true.  STP has a different impedance than UTP.  We made the mistake
of wiring two large buildings with IBM Type 2 (STP) cable.  We have had problems
running 10BaseT over long (75-100 meters) distances as a result.  Believe me,
there is a BIG difference in cost between UTP and STP if you have to use plenum-
rated cable (Teflon)...

> >2) What options are available for small (less than a dozen nodes) networks
> >currently running coax and wanting to move to 10BaseT?  
> 
>   If really small, then why not just use continue to use what you have
> where you have it, move to STP for new locations and add
> tranceivers/T-joints where there are new drops in existing coax
> locations.
> 



---
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+    
|  John K. Scoggin, Jr.			Email: scoggin@delmarva.com   |
|  Supervisor, Network Operations       Phone: (302) 451-5200         |
|  Delmarva Power & Light Company       Fax:   (302) 451-5321         |
|  500 N. Wakefield Drive               NOC:   (800) 388-7076         |
|  Newark, DE 19714-6066		                              |
|  The opinions expressed are not those of Delmarva Power, simply the |
|  product of an over-active imagination...                           |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1k0nsgINNlvr@blackhole.delmarva.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!blackhole.delmarva.com!mercury!scoggin
References: <C1Dt40.9AF@ra.nrl.navy.mil>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!blackhole.delmarva.com!mercury!scoggin
From: scoggin@delmarva.com (John K. Scoggin, Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.misc
Subject: Re: building wiring
Date: 25 Jan 1993 12:53:36 GMT
Organization: Delmarva Power & Light Company
Lines: 59
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <1k0nsgINNlvr@blackhole.delmarva.com>
References: <C1Dt40.9AF@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
Reply-To: scoggin@delmarva.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: mercury.delmarva.com