Re: My network speed is only 10MB
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 08:47:16 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 2/4/2012 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote:
>> No, I can't see why is not that popular within the US, there are many
>> advantadges for having shielded cables because external interferences -
>> that are not always under your control- still apply (e.g., wireless
>> connections, proximity to high power lines or electrical equipments...)
>> whose effects can be properly minimized with cabling shielding.
> These same effects are eliminated, in the US, by installation standards.
> These are are always under the control of the installer/contractor.
> There is no guess work involved and everything is predictable and "under
> your control".
You never know what kind of company is going to be installed next to your
garden, right? So one day you open the door and find a power plant is
your brand-new neighbor. At the time you (or a professional contractor)
installed the network facilities neither of you could guess the new
situation and the installation was not prepared to deal with that.
You can control what you know and prepare for unforeseen upcoming
circumstances is always a good strategy.
> Wireless signals do not affect UTP ethernet cabling. Proximity to
> internal AC cabling, induction sources such as power distribution
> closets, AC motors, florescent lights, etc, is avoided during building
> construction or retrofit, because the cable plant is included in the
> architectural design, just like water pipes, sewer pipes, electrical
> conduit, etc.
Not at all. This is something you can't decide. Only when you start
having problems you do figure something has changed and start looking
outside your own premises and search for the root of the problem.
> In the US, in the case of environments such as manufacturing floors etc
> with horrific EMI levels, fiber is used instead of UTP CAT5/6. With EFI
> levels that high, even STP won't save you.
Fiber is (still) not an option for the LAN.
Here in Spain, the ISPs have just started to install FTTH for residential
and business users just a year or so ago, but it's not widely implemented
and it's only for Internet access. Cooper is the king here for the LAN
> In summary, when installed correctly, UTP ethernet cable is superior to
> STP, due to the lower cost of the cable, connectors, and patch panels,
> and labor.
I disagree. Most of the UTP cables are "user-made", badly assembled, poor
quality and installed completely unstested while shielded cables came
certified from the manufacturer.
> Something worth mentioning is that over the past 10-12 years, a high
> percentage of new large office buildings and high rise apartments
> constructed in the US have had 100% fiber cable plants, no copper
> whatsoever, even including fiber into the cubicles. The only copper UTP
> in such facilities being patch cables from servers to core switches and
> between switch stacks. Note that datacenter copper is not part of the
> cable plant. "Cable plant" is the slang term for "structural cable
> installation", plant used as a verb, analogous to planting tomatoes in
> one's garden.
Fiber is another different thing. We do also have it installed since the
last summer (4 FTTH lines, a 16-fibers cable) but working with the fiber
can be only done by certified installers and the required tools are very
expensive, not every company can afford that.
> Cost is one of the drivers. Today a 1000ft spool of 62.5/125 multimode
> fiber is equivalent or cheaper than CAT6a UTP. The installation labor
> is about the same as UTP. We'll continue to see more fiber to the
> desktop as the cost of copper continues to increase. The switch cost in
> an all fiber plant is higher per port due to the multimode transceivers,
> but not prohibitively so when purchased in volume.
The price of the fiber devices... Routers, NIC adapters, switches, etc...
they're still very costly (almost prohibitive here, but Spain is 15 years
ahead USA in these regards) and unless you have an infrastructure capable
of making use of such speeds you're wasting your money.