|Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2000 - 5:58 pm: |
Sorry this is so long winded......
I have the following problem and would appreciate any help anyone can give:
I have 2 PC's each running win98 and each with a 3COM 905C NIC installed.
I am trying to network the two computers using a Linksys cable modem router. I have a 3COM homeconnect cable modem supplying the internet connection to the router.
Here are the facts:
When I have the computers side by side and I plug each into the router using a pre-made cat 5 cable, the network runs great. I can do file sharing and simultaneous internet sharing.
However, I want to set up one of the computers in another room, so I ran about 60 feet of Radio Shack cat 5 cable through the walls and connected each end to a jack. I plugged short pre-made cables from the jacks to the hub and NIC.
But, the computer that was connected to the hub through the long cable would not show up on the network.
I once again set the computers side by side, but this time I connected the 2nd computer to the hub using a 1 ft length of Radio Shack cat 5 cable between the 2 jacks, and the 2 pre-made cables. This time the 2nd computer showed up on the network.
Next, I used a new coil of Radio Shack cat 5 cable and, keeping the two computers side by side, I simply replaced the 1 ft length of cable with a 60 foot coil. The 2nd computer did not show up on the network, even though the only change was to a longer piece of cable between the two jacks.
I tested the continuity of each of the 8 wires in the new coil and they each tested fine.
Any ideas why the longer wires wont work for me? I believe the cat 5 cable is supposed to be good for over 300 feet.
Thanks for the help!
|Posted on Monday, May 22, 2000 - 6:30 am: |
There is a type of cable designed for going through walls, in Canada it is the law that it is used for internal network wiring, called cat7, and it seems to work better over long distances.
See if you can get any of this. It is usually grey. It is wired the same, but the sheild properties are different.
Also, if the cable was made incorrectly, with too much length left untwisted when the ends were attached, your range would be severly reduced.
|Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2000 - 8:03 am: |
Well, I have to disagree with Danny on this, you are well under the length limits for cat5. I suspect that you have a bad crimp job on one end of your longer cable, did you do these yourself ? If so, I would redo them, or buy pre-made cable. Also, you mention that you plugged the ends of this cable into "connectors" what tyoe connectors ?
|Danny Albers (Danny)
|Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2000 - 11:37 am: |
I did not say the length limit of CAT 5 was exceeded, I merely pointed out an alternative cable I felt would be better. Just because a cable can carry data over X amount of distance, doesn't mean another cable doesn't do it better.
As well, the cable did pass the continuity check showing that the crimp took, but there could be an abundance of untwisted wire below it, and no continuity check would reveal that. Although, it would account for a severe reduction in cable range and data transfer speed (cross talk).
I don't mean to sound like I'm debating you, in fact we both pretty much came to the same conclusions. However, I feel I was a little mis-quoted in two areas now and (maybe its a weakness) it annoyed me.