How to make a shielded cat6 patch cable

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

Hello,

I need to know how to make a cat6 shielded patch cable (sstp/fftp). All
sites I have found explain how to build an unshielded cable (cat5/5e or
cat6) :-(

Do you have documents or URL which can help me ?

--
Laurent GARNIER

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

laurent GARNIER wrote:

> I need to know how to make a cat6 shielded patch cable (sstp/fftp). All
> sites I have found explain how to build an unshielded cable (cat5/5e or
> cat6) :-(

What is it being used for? Ethernet is supposed to be UTP.

How you actually make the cable probably depends on how
it is to be used. I believe there are shielded RJ45 plugs,
but how you get the shield contact all the way through I
don't know.

-- glen

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> laurent GARNIER wrote:
>
>> I need to know how to make a cat6 shielded patch cable (sstp/fftp).
>> All sites I have found explain how to build an unshielded cable
>> (cat5/5e or cat6) :-(
>
>
> What is it being used for? Ethernet is supposed to be UTP.

In my case, shielded cables are used for long distance copper
GigaEthernet and to be compliant with future Copper Ethernet evolutions.

--
Laurent GARNIER

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

laurent GARNIER wrote:

> glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>> laurent GARNIER wrote:
>>
>>> I need to know how to make a cat6 shielded patch cable (sstp/fftp).
>>> All sites I have found explain how to build an unshielded cable
>>> (cat5/5e or cat6) :-(
>>
>>
>> What is it being used for? Ethernet is supposed to be UTP.
>
> In my case, shielded cables are used for long distance copper
> GigaEthernet and to be compliant with future Copper Ethernet evolutions.

To what specific standard are you referring?


--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, laurent GARNIER wrote:

> In my case, shielded cables are used for long distance copper
> GigaEthernet

My understanding is that the use of STP instead of UTP actually
*de*creases the maximum length over which copper ethernet can be
guaranteed.

If you're really interested in longer distances, and/or worried about
interference, pickup etc., then fibre would probably be a better
choice, and has become reasonably affordable in comparison, whereas
the price differential used to be considerable.

("fiber", for transpondian readers)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

laurent GARNIER wrote:




> Hello,

> I need to know how to make a cat6 shielded patch cable (sstp/fftp). All

> sites I have found explain how to build an unshielded cable (cat5/5e or

> cat6) :-(

> Do you have documents or URL which can help me ?

Simply don't mess with it!
There is no good way to make it right without special equipment, so do
yourself a favor and buy one (usually for less than $10 online)


Cheers!
DA
http://www.telecom-gear.com

-------------------------------------




##-----------------------------------------------##
Delivered via http://www.telecom-gear.com
http://www.telecom-gear.com
no-spam access to your favorite newsgroup -
comp.dcom.lans.ethernet - 1947 messages and counting!
##-----------------------------------------------##

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

Alan J. Flavell wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, laurent GARNIER wrote:
>
>
>>In my case, shielded cables are used for long distance copper
>>GigaEthernet
>
>
> My understanding is that the use of STP instead of UTP actually
> *de*creases the maximum length over which copper ethernet can be
> guaranteed.

Argggghhh ! I thougth wrong things about shielded cables. For me
"shield" was equivalent of "better quality".

> If you're really interested in longer distances, and/or worried about
> interference, pickup etc., then fibre would probably be a better
> choice, and has become reasonably affordable in comparison, whereas
> the price differential used to be considerable.
>
> ("fiber", for transpondian readers)

Our purpose is to interconnect network equipments within several 19'
rack-cabinet with copper gigaethernet links. Rack-Cabinets are close
from each other but sometimes the link's length could be higher than 100
meters.

What type of copper ethernet cable I can use for short connections ?
What type of copper ethernet cable I can use for long connections ?

Is yours above recommendations could support ethernet protocol evolution
(like 10 Gb) ?

Finally, do you have links which could help me to choose my cables ?

--
Laurent GARNIER

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

laurent GARNIER wrote:

> Argggghhh ! I thougth wrong things about shielded cables. For me
> "shield" was equivalent of "better quality".

No, it means the cable is shielded. There are plenty of low quality
shielded cables around.
>
>> If you're really interested in longer distances, and/or worried about
>> interference, pickup etc., then fibre would probably be a better
>> choice, and has become reasonably affordable in comparison, whereas
>> the price differential used to be considerable.
>>
>> ("fiber", for transpondian readers)
>
> Our purpose is to interconnect network equipments within several 19'
> rack-cabinet with copper gigaethernet links. Rack-Cabinets are close
> from each other but sometimes the link's length could be higher than 100
> meters.
>
> What type of copper ethernet cable I can use for short connections ?
> What type of copper ethernet cable I can use for long connections ?

Your choices are stranded for patch cables and solid for "permanent" runs.
You may lose some distance with stranded, but the maximum copper distance
is 100M, except for 10 Gb, which is much less.

>
> Is yours above recommendations could support ethernet protocol evolution
> (like 10 Gb) ?

Fibre is the way to go for any significant distance at 10 Gb.
If you're in a location, where electrical noise is a concern, fibre is the
better choice.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

James Knott wrote:

> laurent GARNIER wrote:
>
>> Argggghhh ! I thougth wrong things about shielded cables. For me
>> "shield" was equivalent of "better quality".
>
> No, it means the cable is shielded. There are plenty of low quality
> shielded cables around.
>>
>>> If you're really interested in longer distances, and/or worried about
>>> interference, pickup etc., then fibre would probably be a better
>>> choice, and has become reasonably affordable in comparison, whereas
>>> the price differential used to be considerable.
>>>
>>> ("fiber", for transpondian readers)
>>
>> Our purpose is to interconnect network equipments within several 19'
>> rack-cabinet with copper gigaethernet links. Rack-Cabinets are close
>> from each other but sometimes the link's length could be higher than 100
>> meters.
>>
>> What type of copper ethernet cable I can use for short connections ?
>> What type of copper ethernet cable I can use for long connections ?
>
> Your choices are stranded for patch cables and solid for "permanent" runs.
> You may lose some distance with stranded, but the maximum copper distance
> is 100M, except for 10 Gb, which is much less.

Has the 10 gig over UTP standard been released?

>> Is yours above recommendations could support ethernet protocol evolution
>> (like 10 Gb) ?
>
> Fibre is the way to go for any significant distance at 10 Gb.
> If you're in a location, where electrical noise is a concern, fibre is the
> better choice.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

J. Clarke wrote:

>> Your choices are stranded for patch cables and solid for "permanent"
>> runs. You may lose some distance with stranded, but the maximum copper
>> distance is 100M, except for 10 Gb, which is much less.
>
> Has the 10 gig over UTP standard been released?
>

I don't know. However, I recall reading that it would only work over a few
metres.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

James Knott wrote:

> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>>> Your choices are stranded for patch cables and solid for "permanent"
>>> runs. You may lose some distance with stranded, but the maximum copper
>>> distance is 100M, except for 10 Gb, which is much less.
>>
>> Has the 10 gig over UTP standard been released?
>>
>
> I don't know. However, I recall reading that it would only work over a
> few metres.

I think you're confusing 802.3ak, which is a released standard for a short
range interconnect over 15 meters of STP Infiniband cable, with the coming
802.3an standard for 10 gig Ethernet over 55-100 meters of some kind of
UTP.

The cable vendors are going to tell you that you will need CAT6 or CAT7
cable for 10 gig, but they also said that about gigabit, even after the
standard that was designed around CAT5 was released, until one of the PHY
vendors got sick of hearing about CAT6 and demonstrated gigabit running on
8 strands of barbed wire--that pretty much put an end to the notion that
CAT6 was _required_. The actual requirement for 10 gig will not be known
until the committee makes an announcement, but odds are that it will be
much less stringent in its cable requirements than the cable vendors want
it to be.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

In article <dan6dv112f2@news3.newsguy.com>,
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:

> James Knott wrote:
>
> The cable vendors are going to tell you that you will need CAT6 or CAT7
> cable for 10 gig, but they also said that about gigabit, even after the
> standard that was designed around CAT5 was released, until one of the PHY
> vendors got sick of hearing about CAT6 and demonstrated gigabit running on
> 8 strands of barbed wire--that pretty much put an end to the notion that
> CAT6 was _required_. The actual requirement for 10 gig will not be known
> until the committee makes an announcement, but odds are that it will be
> much less stringent in its cable requirements than the cable vendors want
> it to be.

P802.3an Draft 1.4 discusses the use of Cat 6 cable for distances up to
55 meters, and an "Augmented Cat 6" cable (ISO 11801 Class F) for
distances up to 100 meters. There is no mention of Cat 5 for use at
10 Gb/s.

Note: My current cat (my third) is appropriately named Cat-3. I see no
reason at this time to upgrade him.


--
Rich Seifert Networks and Communications Consulting
21885 Bear Creek Way
(408) 395-5700 Los Gatos, CA 95033
(408) 228-0803 FAX

Send replies to: usenet at richseifert dot com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

laurent GARNIER wrote:
> Alan J. Flavell wrote:

>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, laurent GARNIER wrote:

>>> In my case, shielded cables are used for long distance copper
>>> GigaEthernet

>> My understanding is that the use of STP instead of UTP actually
>> *de*creases the maximum length over which copper ethernet can be
>> guaranteed.

The usual STP cable is not 100 ohm impedance, so that does tend
to decrease the maximum length with 100 ohm termination, and
likely with matching termination.

> Argggghhh ! I thougth wrong things about shielded cables. For me
> "shield" was equivalent of "better quality".

Well, more expensive, yes. UTP cable depends on the signal being
balanced. That is, the current in one wire of a pair is exactly equal
and in the opposite direction to the other. Transformers are used
to make that happen. A shielded cable has metal around the outside of
either individual pairs or the whole cable. In either case current in
the (inside of) the shield can cancel unbalanced currents from wires inside.

At some point, though, it is possible to get current on the outside of
the shield, in which case the shield does not help, and actually
radiates the signal. At higher frequencies it gets harder to keep the
signal from the outside, and connector design gets very important.

The shield might have to couple to the metal box, and then you have
problems with ground loops.

>> If you're really interested in longer distances, and/or worried about
>> interference, pickup etc., then fibre would probably be a better
>> choice, and has become reasonably affordable in comparison, whereas
>> the price differential used to be considerable.

>> ("fiber", for transpondian readers)

> Our purpose is to interconnect network equipments within several 19'
> rack-cabinet with copper gigaethernet links. Rack-Cabinets are close
> from each other but sometimes the link's length could be higher than 100
> meters.

As far as I know, fiber. The cable prices aren't so different, and very
likely less than STP cable. Connectors are more expensive, but likely
less than STP connectors. Connector installation is more expensive, but
again likely less than proper installation of STP connectors.

-- glen

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

Rich Seifert wrote:

> In article <dan6dv112f2@news3.newsguy.com>,
> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>> James Knott wrote:

Actually, I'll accept the blame for the following.

>> The cable vendors are going to tell you that you will need CAT6 or CAT7
>> cable for 10 gig, but they also said that about gigabit, even after the
>> standard that was designed around CAT5 was released, until one of the PHY
>> vendors got sick of hearing about CAT6 and demonstrated gigabit running
>> on 8 strands of barbed wire--that pretty much put an end to the notion
>> that
>> CAT6 was _required_. The actual requirement for 10 gig will not be known
>> until the committee makes an announcement, but odds are that it will be
>> much less stringent in its cable requirements than the cable vendors want
>> it to be.
>
> P802.3an Draft 1.4 discusses the use of Cat 6 cable for distances up to
> 55 meters, and an "Augmented Cat 6" cable (ISO 11801 Class F) for
> distances up to 100 meters. There is no mention of Cat 5 for use at
> 10 Gb/s.

Good to have some official word. Any mention of the CAT7 STP that I'm
seeing claimed on some of the vendor sites?

> Note: My current cat (my third) is appropriately named Cat-3. I see no
> reason at this time to upgrade him.

I think you may have just named my next one, Momcat Momcatsdottir having
recently gone to the Great Catnip Patch without leaving progeny.

> --
> Rich Seifert Networks and Communications Consulting
> 21885 Bear Creek Way
> (408) 395-5700 Los Gatos, CA 95033
> (408) 228-0803 FAX
>
> Send replies to: usenet at richseifert dot com

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

Rich Seifert <usenet@richseifert.com.invalid> wrote:
> P802.3an Draft 1.4 discusses the use of Cat 6 cable for
> distances up to 55 meters, and an "Augmented Cat 6" cable
> (ISO 11801 Class F) for distances up to 100 meters. There
> is no mention of Cat 5 for use at 10 Gb/s.

Interesting. What sort of connectors? RJ45?

> Note: My current cat (my third) is appropriately named
> Cat-3. I see no reason at this time to upgrade him.

ROTFL! I think over short runs, he performs just as
well as Cat-5, Cat-5e, Cat-6 or whatever the vendors
will try to sell you.

-- Robert

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

laurent GARNIER wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need to know how to make a cat6 shielded patch cable (sstp/fftp). All
> sites I have found explain how to build an unshielded cable (cat5/5e or
> cat6) :-(
>
> Do you have documents or URL which can help me ?

Thank you for your informations !!!

--
Laurent GARNIER

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

In message <lfSdnbWgHNjR-VPfRVn-qQ@comcast.com>, glen herrmannsfeldt
<gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

> laurent GARNIER wrote:
>
>> I need to know how to make a cat6 shielded patch cable (sstp/fftp). All
>> sites I have found explain how to build an unshielded cable (cat5/5e or
>> cat6) :-(
>
> What is it being used for? Ethernet is supposed to be UTP.

STP is need in electrically noisy environments. One office I know of was
originally cabled with UTP which didn't work, so had to replaced by STP.
The office was near wires carring a few gigawatts of electricity.



--
Member AFFS, WYLUG, SWP (UK), ANL, Leeds SA, Leeds Anti-war coalition
OpenPGP key fingerprint: D0A6 F403 9745 CED4 6B3B 94CC 8D74 8FC9 9F7F CFE4
No to software patents! No to DRM/EUCD - hands off our computers!