Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 17:13:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Vincent Poy <vince@venus.GAIANET.NET> To: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Bill Paul <wpaul@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>, crypt0genic <crypt0genic@ecad.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: poor ethernet performance? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9907161709060.331-100000@venus.GAIANET.NET> In-Reply-To: <199907170005.UAA75267@whizzo.transsys.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 16 Jul 1999, Louis A. Mamakos wrote: > > : Good point but I think it's like how much of 100Mhz a 100BaseTX > > :can push. If it pushes 100%, then it might be wise to have a little more > > :room for overhead. Kinda like a car, better to have reserve power when > > :you need it then pushing it to the max. In regards to 1000BaseT, I > > :thought there was no standards for that yet, atleast all the Gigabit stuff > > :is all fiber and not copper. Quality of cable does matter, atleast in > > :high-end audio/video it does and I'm sure data would be more picky than > > :human ears. > > > > The copper gigabit standard isn't out yet, but I was under the impression > > that they were pretty close. > > > > In regards to audio/video verses ethernet, you have to remember that > > audio and video are *analog*, not digital. The cable quality matters > > for analog, but it only needs to be "good enough" for digital. If you > > don't get any bit errors (and you shouldn't) then a better cable is not > > going to make a difference. > > One of the big deals with the different grades of cable is the degree of > crosstalk between the transmit and receive pairs in the cable sheath. > When you're talking about Category-3 or Category-5 cable systems, this > INCLUDES the connectors, patch panels, cross-connect blocks and cross-connect > cables. Yep, everything in the chain counts. > For instance, you have to work pretty hard to do better than 10Base-T > with a Category-3 wiring system if you have type 66 punch blocks > because of the impedence bump and crosstalk issues. Same sort of things > apply at 100base-T and Category-5 cable systems. Using gold-plated > "Monster Cable" is just pissing away money of the other components are > also up to the same level of "quality" (har, har). I wouldn't rate Monster Cable as really high quality since it seems like their stuff is more marketing then the true value. > And, as Matt said, if you're not getting CRC errors then it's good > enough, and there's no point spending money to get better wire. I know, I'm just wondering how did they get more frequency out of wire of the same size. I can understand it if the wire was a larger guage. > louie > (who uses #12 ROMEX cable for speaker wire.) Cheers, Vince - vince@MCESTATE.COM - vince@GAIANET.NET ________ __ ____ Unix Networking Operations - FreeBSD-Real Unix for Free / / / / | / |[__ ] GaiaNet Corporation - M & C Estate / / / / | / | __] ] Beverly Hills, California USA 90210 / / / / / |/ / | __] ] HongKong Stars/Gravis UltraSound Mailing Lists Admin /_/_/_/_/|___/|_|[____] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9907161709060.331-100000>