Ethernet on a single pair--bye bye wi-fi

[StevieC]

Brian... I know that... I was being cheeky about the DSL. I know it's not the same.

I also know what a Scotchlock is as I worked one summer for Bell Canada (phone Co.) as a tech out in the field repairing and hooking up new phone lines... Interesting job.

2.4 GHz neighbourhood interference could cause problems with his network, but not likely given the range he was running between the router and the card. Would have to be extraordinarily bad for it to affect him.

As would mine if I had the use for a Gigabit's bandwidth on a regular basis but I don't.

 

[brianl703]

Speaking of DSL, I actually have a few SDSL routers (Flowpoint 2200s, plus the Efficient Networks version) that can operate back to back, without a DSLAM. I thought about using a couple of them to solve this single-pair problem but I wanted something passive, that wouldn't possibly fail, wouldn't possibly lose it's configuration, etc. so the Pair Savers were it.

3M tested Scotchloks about 10 years ago and found that cat 5 cable spliced with them still met the cat 5 specs. I tested them about 6 months ago and found that cat 5 cable spliced with them would still work fine for gigabit ethernet.

I should mention that this is a townhouse. Neighbors are on the other side of the wall.

I use Gigabit because it really didn't cost all that much to upgrade to it, and because my Linux box is also a fileserver.

 

[OVERKILL]

Brian:

What channel were you running your wireless on?

 

[TooManyWheels]

Originally Posted By: brianl703

I should mention that this is a townhouse. Neighbors are on the other side of the wall.


I'm guessing that explains just about everything.

It needn't even be actual conversation to cause trouble. I had an interference problem caused by a 2.4 phone. WiFi connection would drop with phone calls, but also at other seemingly random times. I eventually read that the base station would periodically poll the phone, which I assumed caused the other drops. Replacing with a 5.8 totally cured the problem.

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Brian:

What channel were you running your wireless on?


I ran Nestumbler and channel 1 seemed the least used. Then after a while I tried channel 6.

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: TooManyWheels

I'm guessing that explains just about everything.

It needn't even be actual conversation to cause trouble. I had an interference problem caused by a 2.4 phone. WiFi connection would drop with phone calls, but also at other seemingly random times. I eventually read that the base station would periodically poll the phone, which I assumed caused the other drops. Replacing with a 5.8 totally cured the problem.


The 802.11b/g protocols apparently defer to other wireless devices operating in the 2.4GHz range, that is they wait until the channel is clear before transmitting anything. This been described as a "polite" protocol.

There should be an "[censored]" mode for 802.11b/g where it just transmits without regard for what's using the channel. The cordless phones do.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: brianl703
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Brian:

What channel were you running your wireless on?


I ran Nestumbler and channel 1 seemed the least used. Then after a while I tried channel 6.


I've had a lot of luck using 11.....

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: brianl703

The 802.11b/g protocols apparently defer to other wireless devices operating in the 2.4GHz range, that is they wait until the channel is clear before transmitting anything. This been described as a "polite" protocol.

There should be an "[censored]" mode for 802.11b/g where it just transmits without regard for what's using the channel. The cordless phones do.


There was an IEEE study (forgot which one) that if you don't sense before accessing the channel, the actual usable bandwidth drop to about 1/3 of the maximum with carrier sensing because people keep [censored] -ing each other as you would have. Makes everything unusable anyways.

 

[brianl703]

Did the IEEE study show what happens if the interfering signal is a cordless phone? I would hope that [censored] mode would cause the cordless phone user to hang up, ending the interference.