[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
Re: RJ45 CAT5e plugs
- To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: RJ45 CAT5e plugs
- From: "mark_harrison_uk2" <mph@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:52:47 -0000
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Well, CAT5e and CAT5 specify a MINIMUM set of standards, therefore a
well-made CAT5 (not e) cable MIGHT be OK if it's actually made "well
in excess".
It does make a difference, but only really once you get to gigabit
ethernet (and the faster ATM speeds.)
At 100Mb/sec you should be OK with CAT5 most of the time.
The biggest issue, AIUI, is interference on the _untwisted_ part of
the cables where the noise rejection can't happen. This untwisted
part is unfeasibly small for full CAT5e certification (like, you
won't believe how little slack you're allowed - hint: use a good
quality crimping tool.)
Regards,
Mark
--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "Stuart Worrall" <stuart@s...>
wrote:
> Yup, the brand is Philex and its got cat5e plastered all over the
> packaging.
>
> Not sure if it really matters with plugs though. Can anyone on the
list
> comment on the standards for cat5e and if it matters for the rj-45
> plugs??
>
http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe: ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe: ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner: ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|