Re: A minimalist network
On Thu 18 Aug 2016 at 11:07:28 (-0400), rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2016 09:58:23 AM Richard Owlett wrote:
> > On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> > > On 08/17/2016 07:45 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
>
> > > 6. Distances between devices.
>
> ...
>
> > 6. < 1 ft.
>
> Because I learned one thing here already (Gigabit ethernet usually doesn't
> require crossover cables), I'll see if I can learn something else ;-)
>
> Back in the "good ole days" there used to be a minimum segment / cable length
> for an Ethernet cable--I don't recall to what all it applied--i.e., I don't
> recall if it applied to thick Ethernet, thin (coax) Ethernet, Cat 5 and Cat 6,
> all of the above or just some of the above. I always used a minimum of 6' and
> that worked for me.
>
> Does that apply for Gigabit Ethernet?
6 feet is sensible. This may be why modems and routers come with
6-foot cables, the cheapest guaranteed to work. Shorter could give
problems with cheap devices.
But there's no harm in the devices themselves being closer,
eg stacked, as long as the ventilation works and you don't have our
sort of weather (often >100°F outside).
In days of yore, there was a minimum distance on coax because
every transmission was effectively a broadcast, and had to pass a
certain distance (≡time) before any reply would be recognised *as a
reply* rather than the transmitter hearing itself transmitting.
And if you had a problem, everyone on that segment would share it too.
They say half a metre, but we were not allowed anything less than
one metre. And 50Ω, not 75Ω TV cable!
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: