Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL based on the
Verizon line-test and www.speedtest.org, and the one weak spot in my
home wiring could be the wire from the outdood NID to the Verizon
modem. I"m not using the wiring that came with the house***.

Right now, I"m using some *indoor* but outside the wall phone wire,
the flexible kind that's meant to work with modular plugs and go from
the wall socket to the phone. But I have it from the NID, running
loosely up the side of the house*** to a window which is shut but not
very tightly, to the hall and back into the next bedroom with the
modem, a total of about 50 feet.

Is OUTSIDE THE WALL wire inadequate for such a llong length, 50'?

I ask because a few months ago I bought some specially thin indoor
modular phone wiring, meant to go under a carpet without making a
lump, sold at Home Depot, and when I used that, my phones worked fine,
but my internet worked NOTat all.

Changing back to a new piece of the original outside the wall, but not
thin, wiring got me back to normal, that is, normally slow.

Should I be using the round, bendable but not really flexible wire,
where each of the four colors is a single strand of wire, which is
meant to go inside walls and for longer distances?

It's a bunch of effort^^ to try this, so I need some encouragement.

^^In practice, it will mean I won't be able to shut the window even as
much as now, until I drill a hole in the window frame.

***I can't use the inside the wall wiring that came with the house
because there is an intermittent short somewhere. I looked for it for
hours, disconnecting wires etc. and couldn't find it.


Or is it more likely my 4-year old Verzion modem needs replacing?
Or that there is a problem in part that Verizon controls?

Thanks a lot.

It's not the thickness. It's (I assume) the cable's characteristic impedance
and lossiness that determine its usability..


I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL...

If it's low-speed DSL, why should that be a surprise?

In article ,
micky wrote:

Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL based on the
Verizon line-test and www.speedtest.org, and the one weak spot in my
home wiring could be the wire from the outdood NID to the Verizon
modem. I"m not using the wiring that came with the house***.

Right now, I"m using some *indoor* but outside the wall phone wire,
the flexible kind that's meant to work with modular plugs and go from
the wall socket to the phone. But I have it from the NID, running
loosely up the side of the house*** to a window which is shut but not
very tightly, to the hall and back into the next bedroom with the
modem, a total of about 50 feet.

Is OUTSIDE THE WALL wire inadequate for such a llong length, 50'?

Maybe. Maybe not. I wouldn't use it myself unless I had no
alternative.

The only way I can see to really test it, is to move your DSL modem to
your demarc point (NID) and connect it there, and try a download with
all of your house wiring disconnected. Then, try it with a 50-foot
length of your flat modular cable, and see how your speeds behave.
Start reconnecting devices in the current house wiring, and see what
happens.

With many DSL modems and routers, you can get status reports on the
DSL connection (either via UDP datagrams transmitted by the modem, or
by accessing a built-in web-server interface). The figures I see on
my modem include the upstream and downstream bit-rates, the signal
levels and/or signal-to-noise ratio, rate of CRC errors or other
packet problems, the number of DSL renegotiations and rate changes,
and so forth.

If you find that you've got lousy performance (either raw-DSL, or poor
download rate) with your modem connected at the demarc, and no house
wiring at all attached... start griping at your phone company / ISP.
If you find that the 50-foot length of modular cable hurts performance
(maybe increasing the signal attenuation?), replace it.

You might find that the presence of one or more of your existing
phones hurts performance. This could be the case if you haven't
installed microfilters on those devices (they could be loading down
the DSL frequencies). It might be the case even if you *do* have
microfilters... you could get better results if you installed a
full-sized box-mounted "DSL splitter" right at your demarc, and run
separate lines to the DSL modem (from the unfiltered port) and the
house wiring (from the filtered port).

As to the wire itself... my recommendation these days is to do all
inside phone wiring using real network-grade cable... CAT 5 or better.
I no longer use the old non-twisted four-wire "station cable" for any
new runs, and I replace it with CAT 5 when convenient. There's one 6'
length of modular cable between my DSL modem and the unfiltered jack
for it, but the run from the jack back to the demarc is CAT 5.

The reduced attenuation, and better interference rejection of a good
twisted-pair cable is worth the trouble, I think... after all, DSL is
low-frequency RF and deserves to be treated in the same way as (e.g.)
10BaseT Ethernet.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

micky wrote:
Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL based on the
Verizon line-test and www.speedtest.org, and the one weak spot in my
home wiring could be the wire from the outdood NID to the Verizon
modem. I"m not using the wiring that came with the house***.

Right now, I"m using some *indoor* but outside the wall phone wire,
the flexible kind that's meant to work with modular plugs and go from
the wall socket to the phone. But I have it from the NID, running
loosely up the side of the house*** to a window which is shut but not
very tightly, to the hall and back into the next bedroom with the
modem, a total of about 50 feet.

Is OUTSIDE THE WALL wire inadequate for such a llong length, 50'?

I ask because a few months ago I bought some specially thin indoor
modular phone wiring, meant to go under a carpet without making a
lump, sold at Home Depot, and when I used that, my phones worked fine,
but my internet worked NOTat all.

Changing back to a new piece of the original outside the wall, but not
thin, wiring got me back to normal, that is, normally slow.

Should I be using the round, bendable but not really flexible wire,
where each of the four colors is a single strand of wire, which is
meant to go inside walls and for longer distances?

It's a bunch of effort^^ to try this, so I need some encouragement.

^^In practice, it will mean I won't be able to shut the window even as
much as now, until I drill a hole in the window frame.

***I can't use the inside the wall wiring that came with the house
because there is an intermittent short somewhere. I looked for it for
hours, disconnecting wires etc. and couldn't find it.

If you can catch it when it's shorted, the phone company has TDR tools
that can tell where the short is. First thing to do is check the
sockets. I've seen bent pins in the socket caused by forcing the plug
in at an angle or by tripping over the cord and yanking it out.


Or is it more likely my 4-year old Verzion modem needs replacing?
Or that there is a problem in part that Verizon controls?

Thanks a lot.

You need to be more specific. "Slow" to some people may seem fast to
others.

My download speeds are slow. Some sites give me the full 1Mb/s, but most
are a fraction of that. And it's been getting worse. Think it has a lot
to do with the increased demand from streaming video and significantly
greater intrusion from virus scanners, popup blockers, firewalls, all eating
up processor power. Even if your burst rate meets the speed, the
surfing experience can slow significantly.
How far you are from the central office will also affect the speed you get.

AS suggested by others, take your modem out to the box and plug it
directly into the phone company and run some speed tests. If that's slow,
call the provider and demand what you're paying for. If you don't do
that, they'll take a quick look at their computer and claim it's inside
your house. They'll gladly come fix it, but it's gonna cost you.

After several tries with Verizon getting nowhere, I stumbled on the phone
number for the local manager for DSL service. She was very helpful and
sent someone to check the modem on their end. It was configured wrong and
I got instant improvement.

Don't remember the exact terminology, but when they ran out of phone
lines, they started creating new ones by bridging across two pairs to
make a third. That's not good for DSL.

There's a box on the outside of the house. I disconnected the wires from
the house and inserted a DSL filter to isolate the whole house.
Then I ran a wire from the phone company side around the perimeter
of the house thru a hole in the wall to my DSL modem. Used about 50 feet
of double twisted pair phone wire. Been working fine since.

Thin stuff designed to run under a carpet is not advised for inside or
outside
use with a dsl modem.

On Dec 22, 12:47*pm, micky wrote:
Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL based on the
Verizon line-test andwww.speedtest.org, and the one weak spot in my
home wiring could be the wire from the outdood NID to the Verizon
modem. * I"m not using the wiring that came with the house***.

Right now, I"m using some *indoor* but outside the wall phone wire,
the flexible kind that's meant to work with modular plugs and go from
the wall socket to the phone. * But I have it from the NID, running
loosely up the side of the house*** to a window which is shut but not
very tightly, to the hall and back into the next bedroom with the
modem, a total of about 50 feet.

Is OUTSIDE THE WALL wire inadequate for such a llong length, 50'?

I ask because a few months ago I bought some specially thin indoor
modular phone wiring, meant to go under a carpet without making a
lump, sold at Home Depot, and when I used that, my phones worked fine,
but my internet worked NOTat all.

Changing back to a new piece of the original outside the wall, but not
thin, wiring got me back to normal, that is, normally slow.

Should I be using the round, bendable but not really flexible wire,
where each of the four colors is a single strand of wire, which is
meant to go inside walls and for longer distances?

It's a bunch of effort^^ to try this, so I need some encouragement.

^^In practice, it will mean I won't be able to shut the window even as
much as now, until I drill a hole in the window frame.

***I can't use the inside the wall wiring that came with the house
because there is an intermittent short somewhere. *I looked for it for
hours, disconnecting wires etc. and couldn't find it.

Or is it more likely my 4-year old Verzion modem needs replacing?
Or that there is a problem in part that Verizon controls?

Thanks a lot.

OK - You have the "inside wiring" running from the NID to the modem.
What else is connected to the telephone line, either in the house or
at the NID? Do you have a real telephone hooked up at all? If there
is any house wiring connected directly to the NID, without going thru
the splitter that normally splits the internet frequencies from the
audio frequencies, there are alll sorts of bad scenarios. First tell
us more about what your connections are, and then I and others can
give you a much more detailed answer.

microsoft.public.windowsxp.general added, since a couple weeks ago I
asked them about readjusting my TCP parameters. At most I changed
MTU then to 1492 from 1500 using Dr.TCP, but another program or
webpage continued to show it as 1500. So I don't konw if I changed
it or not, or if I change it and it reset, and my speed didn't improve
or get worse. . Nothing else was attempted to be changed, nor did I
use the Verizon optimizer, which claims to change those parameters
correctly, but I don't know if it gives a way to change things back. .

But now the problem seems to be solved!!!!

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 11:25:58 -0800, (Dave Platt)
wrote:

In article ,
micky wrote:

Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL based on the
Verizon line-test and www.speedtest.org, and the one weak spot in my
home wiring could be the wire from the outdood NID to the Verizon
modem. I"m not using the wiring that came with the house***.

Right now, I"m using some *indoor* but outside the wall phone wire,
the flexible kind that's meant to work with modular plugs and go from
the wall socket to the phone. But I have it from the NID, running
loosely up the side of the house*** to a window which is shut but not
very tightly, to the hall and back into the next bedroom with the
modem, a total of about 50 feet.

Is OUTSIDE THE WALL wire inadequate for such a llong length, 50'?

Maybe. Maybe not. I wouldn't use it myself unless I had no
alternative.

The only way I can see to really test it, is to move your DSL modem to
your demarc point (NID) and connect it there,

That's a great idea that you and Mike both had. I wish I had been
pursuing this when it was warmer out and the days were longer. A
warm day like today I had to work in the morning, and the weekend will
be colder.

and try a download with
all of your house wiring disconnected.

I didn't realize until you said this that after my last rearranging, I
have only one base station phone next to the modem (and 3 wireless
phones) connected, None of the original house wiring has been
connected for months.

Jumping ahead, I found your post as a whole encouragement enough to
think the wiring might be the problem, so since it was warm, I just
replaced the wire with the round somewhat stiff in-the-wallf stuff,
instead of the jack to phone wire that I had been using for a 50 foot
run.

Using www.speedtest.net, that I had used before. My upload speed was
50 to 85% of what it had been, but my download speed was 2.5 to 3
times what it had been with the same test!! Over 6 new tests.

Using the Verizon provided test -- I wonder if this works for those
who don't have Verizon --
http://my.verizon.com/micro/speedtest/broadband/
my upload speed was the same as it had been but my download speed was
about 3.3 times what it had been with the same test, over 4 new tests.

Hoop-de-doo.

Speedtest.net also measures ping time, which started out very high but
eventually got quicker than it had been. I presume it only pings ..
when? Once at the start of a down or upload? So that's not a major
factor, right? And I don't really care about upload times because I
upload far less, mostly just text for newgroups and email, and I'm not
sitting their waiting, usually.

So everything is great now!!! The wire seems to really make a big
difference. I should have pursued this diligently when I first got
DSL, 4 years ago. (I hate to admit it, but I've been depressed)

I wonder if it slowed down my dial-up too, before then.

They say I should get 500 to 1000 KB download speed. And finally, I'm
in that range instead of 220 at most.

speedtest.net tests
Ping DL in KB UL in KB
410 550 070
494 600 110
221 540 080
98 590 070 Different Baltimore server.
300 520 110 Comcast
91 670 110

Verizon tests
.738 140
.. 734 141
734 140
740 138

I'm thinking that the Verizon values are consistently higher because
there are fewer links in the data chain, right? The data doesn't
have to go via the net to or from comcast.


At each end of the round 4 conductor wire, I attached a surface mount
modular telephone jack that I had saved, and used an 8-inch piece of
modular wire to plug into the NID and the modem. At the NID, I put
the jack box in a ziploc bag, and tomorrow I'll tape the bag even more
shut than it is now.

I didn't cut the wire yet, until I saw if it worked, and I have about
20 feet or more folded back and forth in 10-inch sections. I suppose
that might be lowering my speed also, right?

I read your post and Mike's and if there is anything i should answer,
I plan to do that tomorrow, but right now I want to find a movie or
Youtube thing I can watch, or one of those Republican debates that I
missed when they were live amd my DSL barely worked. .

I watched one video segment from C-span.org before measuring my
speeds, and it was flawless.

Thanks to you both, and William. And Paul and Paul and Char and
everyone from XP who helped me before.


Then, try it with a 50-foot
length of your flat modular cable, and see how your speeds behave.
Start reconnecting devices in the current house wiring, and see what
happens.

With many DSL modems and routers, you can get status reports on the
DSL connection (either via UDP datagrams transmitted by the modem, or
by accessing a built-in web-server interface). The figures I see on
my modem include the upstream and downstream bit-rates, the signal
levels and/or signal-to-noise ratio, rate of CRC errors or other
packet problems, the number of DSL renegotiations and rate changes,
and so forth.

If you find that you've got lousy performance (either raw-DSL, or poor
download rate) with your modem connected at the demarc, and no house
wiring at all attached... start griping at your phone company / ISP.
If you find that the 50-foot length of modular cable hurts performance
(maybe increasing the signal attenuation?), replace it.

You might find that the presence of one or more of your existing
phones hurts performance. This could be the case if you haven't
installed microfilters on those devices (they could be loading down
the DSL frequencies). It might be the case even if you *do* have
microfilters... you could get better results if you installed a
full-sized box-mounted "DSL splitter" right at your demarc, and run
separate lines to the DSL modem (from the unfiltered port) and the
house wiring (from the filtered port).

As to the wire itself... my recommendation these days is to do all
inside phone wiring using real network-grade cable... CAT 5 or better.
I no longer use the old non-twisted four-wire "station cable" for any
new runs, and I replace it with CAT 5 when convenient. There's one 6'
length of modular cable between my DSL modem and the unfiltered jack
for it, but the run from the jack back to the demarc is CAT 5.

The reduced attenuation, and better interference rejection of a good
twisted-pair cable is worth the trouble, I think... after all, DSL is
low-frequency RF and deserves to be treated in the same way as (e.g.)
10BaseT Ethernet.

From: "micky"



microsoft.public.windowsxp.general added, since a couple weeks ago I
asked them about readjusting my TCP parameters. At most I changed
MTU then to 1492 from 1500 using Dr.TCP, but another program or
webpage continued to show it as 1500. So I don't konw if I changed
it or not, or if I change it and it reset, and my speed didn't improve
or get worse. . Nothing else was attempted to be changed, nor did I
use the Verizon optimizer, which claims to change those parameters
correctly, but I don't know if it gives a way to change things back. .

But now the problem seems to be solved!!!!

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 11:25:58 -0800, (Dave Platt)
wrote:

In article ,
micky wrote:

Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL based on the
Verizon line-test and www.speedtest.org, and the one weak spot in my
home wiring could be the wire from the outdood NID to the Verizon
modem. I"m not using the wiring that came with the house***.

Right now, I"m using some *indoor* but outside the wall phone wire,
the flexible kind that's meant to work with modular plugs and go from
the wall socket to the phone. But I have it from the NID, running
loosely up the side of the house*** to a window which is shut but not
very tightly, to the hall and back into the next bedroom with the
modem, a total of about 50 feet.

Is OUTSIDE THE WALL wire inadequate for such a llong length, 50'?

Maybe. Maybe not. I wouldn't use it myself unless I had no
alternative.

The only way I can see to really test it, is to move your DSL modem to
your demarc point (NID) and connect it there,

That's a great idea that you and Mike both had. I wish I had been
pursuing this when it was warmer out and the days were longer. A
warm day like today I had to work in the morning, and the weekend will
be colder.

and try a download with
all of your house wiring disconnected.

I didn't realize until you said this that after my last rearranging, I
have only one base station phone next to the modem (and 3 wireless
phones) connected, None of the original house wiring has been
connected for months.

Jumping ahead, I found your post as a whole encouragement enough to
think the wiring might be the problem, so since it was warm, I just
replaced the wire with the round somewhat stiff in-the-wallf stuff,
instead of the jack to phone wire that I had been using for a 50 foot
run.

Using www.speedtest.net, that I had used before. My upload speed was
50 to 85% of what it had been, but my download speed was 2.5 to 3
times what it had been with the same test!! Over 6 new tests.

Using the Verizon provided test -- I wonder if this works for those
who don't have Verizon --
http://my.verizon.com/micro/speedtest/broadband/
my upload speed was the same as it had been but my download speed was
about 3.3 times what it had been with the same test, over 4 new tests.

Hoop-de-doo.

Speedtest.net also measures ping time, which started out very high but
eventually got quicker than it had been. I presume it only pings ..
when? Once at the start of a down or upload? So that's not a major
factor, right? And I don't really care about upload times because I
upload far less, mostly just text for newgroups and email, and I'm not
sitting their waiting, usually.

So everything is great now!!! The wire seems to really make a big
difference. I should have pursued this diligently when I first got
DSL, 4 years ago. (I hate to admit it, but I've been depressed)

I wonder if it slowed down my dial-up too, before then.

They say I should get 500 to 1000 KB download speed. And finally, I'm
in that range instead of 220 at most.

speedtest.net tests
Ping DL in KB UL in KB
410 550 070
494 600 110
221 540 080
98 590 070 Different Baltimore server.
300 520 110 Comcast
91 670 110

Verizon tests
.738 140
. 734 141
734 140
740 138

I'm thinking that the Verizon values are consistently higher because
there are fewer links in the data chain, right? The data doesn't
have to go via the net to or from comcast.


At each end of the round 4 conductor wire, I attached a surface mount
modular telephone jack that I had saved, and used an 8-inch piece of
modular wire to plug into the NID and the modem. At the NID, I put
the jack box in a ziploc bag, and tomorrow I'll tape the bag even more
shut than it is now.

I didn't cut the wire yet, until I saw if it worked, and I have about
20 feet or more folded back and forth in 10-inch sections. I suppose
that might be lowering my speed also, right?

I read your post and Mike's and if there is anything i should answer,
I plan to do that tomorrow, but right now I want to find a movie or
Youtube thing I can watch, or one of those Republican debates that I
missed when they were live amd my DSL barely worked. .

I watched one video segment from C-span.org before measuring my
speeds, and it was flawless.

Thanks to you both, and William. And Paul and Paul and Char and
everyone from XP who helped me before.


Then, try it with a 50-foot
length of your flat modular cable, and see how your speeds behave.
Start reconnecting devices in the current house wiring, and see what
happens.

With many DSL modems and routers, you can get status reports on the
DSL connection (either via UDP datagrams transmitted by the modem, or
by accessing a built-in web-server interface). The figures I see on
my modem include the upstream and downstream bit-rates, the signal
levels and/or signal-to-noise ratio, rate of CRC errors or other
packet problems, the number of DSL renegotiations and rate changes,
and so forth.

If you find that you've got lousy performance (either raw-DSL, or poor
download rate) with your modem connected at the demarc, and no house
wiring at all attached... start griping at your phone company / ISP.
If you find that the 50-foot length of modular cable hurts performance
(maybe increasing the signal attenuation?), replace it.

You might find that the presence of one or more of your existing
phones hurts performance. This could be the case if you haven't
installed microfilters on those devices (they could be loading down
the DSL frequencies). It might be the case even if you *do* have
microfilters... you could get better results if you installed a
full-sized box-mounted "DSL splitter" right at your demarc, and run
separate lines to the DSL modem (from the unfiltered port) and the
house wiring (from the filtered port).

As to the wire itself... my recommendation these days is to do all
inside phone wiring using real network-grade cable... CAT 5 or better.
I no longer use the old non-twisted four-wire "station cable" for any
new runs, and I replace it with CAT 5 when convenient. There's one 6'
length of modular cable between my DSL modem and the unfiltered jack
for it, but the run from the jack back to the demarc is CAT 5.

The reduced attenuation, and better interference rejection of a good
twisted-pair cable is worth the trouble, I think... after all, DSL is
low-frequency RF and deserves to be treated in the same way as (e.g.)
10BaseT Ethernet.

DSL must use Twisted Pair and the MTU for PPPoE DSL is 1492.


--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:12:14 -0800, mike wrote:

(snip)

Thin stuff designed to run under a carpet is not advised for inside or
outside use with a dsl modem.

There is however, flat and superflat Cat5/5E cable designed for that
exact purpose.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:47:36 -0500, micky
wrote:

Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

If you're 12,000ft or more from the CO, probably not.
If you're less than about 6,000ft from the CO, it might work.
If you're in between, it depends on how you have the DSL filters or
whole house splitter arranged. A clear description of your wiring
derrangement would be helpful.

The problem is resistance and the lack of twisted pairing. Ordinary
#24awg station wire (solid copper) has a resistance of about 26
ohms/1000ft. A 50ft length will have a DC resistance of 2.6 ohms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge
That's not too horrible.

The flat phone cable is #28awg with a resistance of about 70 ohms per
1000ft. Your 50ft length will have a resistance of about 7 ohms.
That's tolerable, but only for fairly small loop resistances. The
lack of twisted pairs will cause some of the signal to radiate to the
unused adjacent conductors and just about any metal that the flat wire
passes.

I suggest you find some CAT5 cable, and use it. Stay away from the
untwisted CAT3 round "station wire" for DSL. Also, if you're at
12,000ft or more from the CO, consider buying a while house DSL
splitter instead of using microfilters.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/350509702597
The advantage is that with the splitter at the MPOE (minimum point of
entry), you can have a literal rats nest of inside wiring, and it
would not affect the DSL performance. Crappy inside wiring is an all
too common problem. You'll need a dedicated CAT5 cable run between
the splitter and your DSL modem.

As for troubleshooting the speed problem, there are a few things you
can do before you rebuild your wiring mess. First, identify the maker
and model of your DSL modem and router. Most of them have a status
page that displays the SNR and line levels. These are sufficient to
determine if you have excessive line loss, noise, a disturber in the
cable bundle, etc. For what the numbers mean, see:
http://www.dslreports.com/faq/16220
Also run a speed test with your unspecified ISP or speedtest.net.

After you print the numbers, drag the DSL modem outside to the NID
(network interface device) box and connect it directly to the incoming
phone line, with the house wiring completely disconnected.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_interface_device
If the numbers are the same, then there's probably nothing wrong with
your inside wiring. However, if moving the modem to the NID magically
fixes your speed problem, then you have an inside wiring problem.

Good luck.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:16:42 +0800, who where wrote:

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:12:14 -0800, mike wrote:

(snip)

Thin stuff designed to run under a carpet is not advised for inside or
outside use with a dsl modem.

There is however, flat and superflat Cat5/5E cable designed for that
exact purpose.

So that would have modular ends and plug into my phone company NID
and also into the DSL modem, right, and it would work right there?



My storm and inner windows don't fit very tightly, and I coulld shut
them on the the indoor wall-to-phone wire I was using with no
crushing, just a crease, like the crease inside your elbow or knee,
inside the two 90^ bends for each window. .

Would bends like that and running right next to the aluminum windows
frames for about an inch each lower my DSL speed much if I used the
flat CAT5E cable?


I hate to drill holes in the upstairs exterior wall or window frame
when I expect to fix the house wiring eventually.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 17:10:11 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Dec 22, 12:47*pm, micky wrote:
Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL based on the
Verizon line-test andwww.speedtest.org, and the one weak spot in my
home wiring could be the wire from the outdood NID to the Verizon
modem. * I"m not using the wiring that came with the house***.

Right now, I"m using some *indoor* but outside the wall phone wire,
the flexible kind that's meant to work with modular plugs and go from
the wall socket to the phone. * But I have it from the NID, running
loosely up the side of the house*** to a window which is shut but not
very tightly, to the hall and back into the next bedroom with the
modem, a total of about 50 feet.

Is OUTSIDE THE WALL wire inadequate for such a llong length, 50'?

I ask because a few months ago I bought some specially thin indoor
modular phone wiring, meant to go under a carpet without making a
lump, sold at Home Depot, and when I used that, my phones worked fine,
but my internet worked NOTat all.

Changing back to a new piece of the original outside the wall, but not
thin, wiring got me back to normal, that is, normally slow.

Should I be using the round, bendable but not really flexible wire,
where each of the four colors is a single strand of wire, which is
meant to go inside walls and for longer distances?

It's a bunch of effort^^ to try this, so I need some encouragement.

^^In practice, it will mean I won't be able to shut the window even as
much as now, until I drill a hole in the window frame.

***I can't use the inside the wall wiring that came with the house
because there is an intermittent short somewhere. *I looked for it for
hours, disconnecting wires etc. and couldn't find it.

Or is it more likely my 4-year old Verzion modem needs replacing?
Or that there is a problem in part that Verizon controls?

Thanks a lot.

OK - You have the "inside wiring" running from the NID to the modem.
What else is connected to the telephone line, either in the house or
at the NID? Do you have a real telephone hooked up at all? If there

Just one real telephone (with 3 wireless extensions from it.

is any house wiring connected directly to the NID, without going thru
the splitter that normally splits the internet frequencies from the
audio frequencies, there are alll sorts of bad scenarios. First tell
us more about what your connections are, and then I and others can
give you a much more detailed answer.

As you probably saw, replacing the wall-jack-to-phone wire I was using
from the modem to the NID with the rather stiff, round,
inside-the-wall wire multiplied my download rate by atout 3.

This is not the stiffest phone wire made, either. I think I've seen
both flimsier and stiffer wire of the same 4-wire 4-color design.


For that matter, my wall-jack-to-phone wire probably wasn't the best
quality either. It came from a 100' roll from Radio Shack iirc. A
lot of wire doesn't come with ratings and I don't know which ratings
matter, and what values are good or bad.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 11:05:19 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

It's not the thickness. It's (I assume) the cable's characteristic impedance
and lossiness that determine its usability..


I have consistently slow download speeds on low-speed DSL...

If it's low-speed DSL, why should that be a surprise?

You're right. I ahould have realized that low is slow. Please
disregard my previuos post. ;-)

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:47:36 -0500, micky wrote:

Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet? Or
do I need thicker wire?

Better to make longer runs with twisted pair, IMO.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:34:17 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:16:42 +0800, who where wrote:

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:12:14 -0800, mike wrote:

(snip)

Thin stuff designed to run under a carpet is not advised for inside or
outside use with a dsl modem.

There is however, flat and superflat Cat5/5E cable designed for that
exact purpose.

Did I say thanks? I should have.

So that would have modular ends and plug into my phone company NID
and also into the DSL modem, right, and it would work right there?

Never mind. I see that it would.


I found this cable, although it's CAT6, not CAT5.
This company only has flat in CAT6, no CAT5. Is that okay?
http://www.primuscable.com/store/p/1...-FT-Black.aspx
CAT6 550MHz Flat Ethernet Patch Cable RJ45 CM PVC Snagless 45 FT Black
$9.68 plus 12 shipping. + almost 22 dollars
T568B (AT&T 258A) Wired
UTP Unshielded Twist Pair
CM Type PVC Jacket
32AWG Flat 4pair Stranded Copper Wire
50 Micron Gold Plated RJ45 Plug
RoHS compliant
The cables are only a slim 1.2mm thick that gives a plenty of
ventilation room for network rack wiring.
This is the longest this store has. I have to see if 45 feet is
enough.


Or
http://www.cablewholesale.com/specs/...10x6-62250.htm
CAT5E Flat UTP Cable, 32AWG, Black, 50 ft Twisted , stranded,
RoHS Compliant $3.95, how can it be so cheap? Plus 7 dollars
shipping, (since the order is under $50) = 11 dollars, half the
price of the first one, but perhaps too cheap to be worth it?



Also, in white but I want black.
http://www.amazon.com/CAT-Flat-Cable.../dp/B000I994X2 CAT 5
E Flat UTP Cable, 32AWG, 50 ft $13.39 Free shipping. ! No mention
of twisted pairs, but I gather all Cat5 is twisted pair.



My storm and inner windows don't fit very tightly, and I coulld shut
them on the the indoor wall-to-phone wire I was using with no
crushing, just a crease, like the crease inside your elbow or knee,
inside the two 90^ bends for each window. .

Would bends like that and running right next to the aluminum windows
frames for about an inch each lower my DSL speed much if I used the
flat CAT5E cable?


I hate to drill holes in the upstairs exterior wall or window frame
when I expect to fix the house wiring eventually.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 12:56:12 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:34:17 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:16:42 +0800, who where wrote:

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:12:14 -0800, mike wrote:

(snip)

Thin stuff designed to run under a carpet is not advised for inside or
outside use with a dsl modem.

There is however, flat and superflat Cat5/5E cable designed for that
exact purpose.

Did I say thanks? I should have.

So that would have modular ends and plug into my phone company NID
and also into the DSL modem, right, and it would work right there?

Never mind. I see that it would.


I found this cable, although it's CAT6, not CAT5.
This company only has flat in CAT6, no CAT5. Is that okay?

Cat6 is higher spec/speed than 5E, which in turn is higher spec than
Cat5.

http://www.primuscable.com/store/p/1...-FT-Black.aspx
CAT6 550MHz Flat Ethernet Patch Cable RJ45 CM PVC Snagless 45 FT Black
$9.68 plus 12 shipping. + almost 22 dollars
T568B (AT&T 258A) Wired
UTP Unshielded Twist Pair
CM Type PVC Jacket
32AWG Flat 4pair Stranded Copper Wire
50 Micron Gold Plated RJ45 Plug
RoHS compliant
The cables are only a slim 1.2mm thick that gives a plenty of
ventilation room for network rack wiring.
This is the longest this store has. I have to see if 45 feet is
enough.


Or
http://www.cablewholesale.com/specs/...10x6-62250.htm
CAT5E Flat UTP Cable, 32AWG, Black, 50 ft Twisted , stranded,
RoHS Compliant $3.95, how can it be so cheap? Plus 7 dollars
shipping, (since the order is under $50) = 11 dollars, half the
price of the first one, but perhaps too cheap to be worth it?

Also, in white but I want black.
http://www.amazon.com/CAT-Flat-Cable.../dp/B000I994X2 CAT 5
E Flat UTP Cable, 32AWG, 50 ft $13.39 Free shipping. ! No mention
of twisted pairs, but I gather all Cat5 is twisted pair.

It is.

Try this one: http://www.vpi.us/cable-sf.html (first hit on googling
"superflat cat5"). Up to 50ft Cat5E.

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 09:59:15 +0800, who where wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 12:56:12 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:34:17 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:16:42 +0800, who where wrote:

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:12:14 -0800, mike wrote:

(snip)

Thin stuff designed to run under a carpet is not advised for inside or
outside use with a dsl modem.

There is however, flat and superflat Cat5/5E cable designed for that
exact purpose.

Did I say thanks? I should have.

So that would have modular ends and plug into my phone company NID
and also into the DSL modem, right, and it would work right there?

Never mind. I see that it would.


I found this cable, although it's CAT6, not CAT5.
This company only has flat in CAT6, no CAT5. Is that okay?

Cat6 is higher spec/speed than 5E, which in turn is higher spec than
Cat5.

http://www.primuscable.com/store/p/1...-FT-Black.aspx
CAT6 550MHz Flat Ethernet Patch Cable RJ45 CM PVC Snagless 45 FT Black
$9.68 plus 12 shipping. + almost 22 dollars
T568B (AT&T 258A) Wired
UTP Unshielded Twist Pair
CM Type PVC Jacket
32AWG Flat 4pair Stranded Copper Wire
50 Micron Gold Plated RJ45 Plug
RoHS compliant
The cables are only a slim 1.2mm thick that gives a plenty of
ventilation room for network rack wiring.
This is the longest this store has. I have to see if 45 feet is
enough.


Or
http://www.cablewholesale.com/specs/...10x6-62250.htm
CAT5E Flat UTP Cable, 32AWG, Black, 50 ft Twisted , stranded,
RoHS Compliant $3.95, how can it be so cheap? Plus 7 dollars
shipping, (since the order is under $50) = 11 dollars, half the
price of the first one, but perhaps too cheap to be worth it?
.......

Try this one: http://www.vpi.us/cable-sf.html (first hit on googling
"superflat cat5"). Up to 50ft Cat5E.

This one is very good. $17 + shipping. Thanks a lot.

I'm embarrassed to say that I only googled on flat, not superflat. I
guess I thought the same companies would sell both, bu I guess not.

Hmmm. I hate to seem ungrateful but I figure you'll want to know. It
says .08 inches, which is iiuc 2 mm. The one from primuscable is
1.2mm, even though it only calls itself flat.

(The cheapest one, Cablewholesale, has a spec sheet,,
http://www.cablewholesale.com/pdfspecs/10x6-6xxxx.pdf is confusing,
Jacket: Min thickness: 0.45mm Good.
Jacket: Overall diameter: 6.00 +/- 0.20 mm 14 times as much?
Must be the width. 8 times for 8 wires and then 3 spaces in betwen
and 2 on the edges. Yes. So 0.45mm would be very thin too, but this
supplies all the DSL so I think I'll pass on this cheapest one. )

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 23:49:44 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 09:59:15 +0800, who where wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 12:56:12 -0500, micky
wrote:
(snip)
I found this cable, although it's CAT6, not CAT5.
This company only has flat in CAT6, no CAT5. Is that okay?

Cat6 is higher spec/speed than 5E, which in turn is higher spec than
Cat5.

http://www.primuscable.com/store/p/1...-FT-Black.aspx
CAT6 550MHz Flat Ethernet Patch Cable RJ45 CM PVC Snagless 45 FT Black
$9.68 plus 12 shipping. + almost 22 dollars
T568B (AT&T 258A) Wired
UTP Unshielded Twist Pair
CM Type PVC Jacket
32AWG Flat 4pair Stranded Copper Wire
50 Micron Gold Plated RJ45 Plug
RoHS compliant
The cables are only a slim 1.2mm thick that gives a plenty of
ventilation room for network rack wiring.
This is the longest this store has. I have to see if 45 feet is
enough.


Or
http://www.cablewholesale.com/specs/...10x6-62250.htm
CAT5E Flat UTP Cable, 32AWG, Black, 50 ft Twisted , stranded,
RoHS Compliant $3.95, how can it be so cheap? Plus 7 dollars
shipping, (since the order is under $50) = 11 dollars, half the
price of the first one, but perhaps too cheap to be worth it?
......

Try this one: http://www.vpi.us/cable-sf.html (first hit on googling
"superflat cat5"). Up to 50ft Cat5E.

This one is very good. $17 + shipping. Thanks a lot.

I'm embarrassed to say that I only googled on flat, not superflat. I
guess I thought the same companies would sell both, bu I guess not.

Hmmm. I hate to seem ungrateful but I figure you'll want to know. It
says .08 inches, which is iiuc 2 mm. The one from primuscable is
1.2mm, even though it only calls itself flat.

(The cheapest one, Cablewholesale, has a spec sheet,,
http://www.cablewholesale.com/pdfspecs/10x6-6xxxx.pdf is confusing,
Jacket: Min thickness: 0.45mm Good.
Jacket: Overall diameter: 6.00 +/- 0.20 mm 14 times as much?
Must be the width. 8 times for 8 wires and then 3 spaces in betwen
and 2 on the edges. Yes. So 0.45mm would be very thin too, but this
supplies all the DSL so I think I'll pass on this cheapest one. )

Cat5/5E/... cable has controlled pair twists, which minimise crosstalk
between pairs. At a twist "crossover" point, you have in the cable
build:

.. sheath
.. wire insulation
.. wire
.. wire insulation
.. wire insulation
.. wire
.. wire insulation
.. sheath

The thinner you try and make the cable the greater the corners you
have to cut. But which of these do you reduce?
The sheath is important where (super)flat cable is to be run under
carpet, as is the conductor and insulation on each wire. No easy
answer.

If I understand your posts, that .08"/2mm will fit your scenario.
Although I haven't used their superflat (they don't ship to my
country, sob!) that 2mm is about as much compromise as I'd personally
accept.

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 10:07:38 +0800, who where wrote:

The thinner you try and make the cable the greater the corners you
have to cut. But which of these do you reduce?
The sheath is important where (super)flat cable is to be run under
carpet, as is the conductor and insulation on each wire. No easy
answer.

Well, super flat uses #28 awg wire. Commodity CAT5 is #24 awg. CAT6
is #23 awg. The #28 awg isn't a problem unless you need to replace
the crimp on connector ends, or you need to run DC power through the
cable.

I've tried using flat (not super-flat) CAT5 under carpets. The stuff
rolls over as the rug moves and eventually creates a lump. Carpet
tape helps, but it still doesn't last. I recently received some flat
cable designed specifically for under the carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/ENG/1499119-Customer_Drawing-RevE.pdf
Note that it's #24 awg wire, which means it uses standard connectors.
I'll be replacing the lumpy CAT5 shortly and expect it to work better.
Note that I have to notch the wings in order to make a turn.

Tyco/Amp's catalog for under carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/UC_Comm_System_Booklet_Rev3.pdf



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Sun, 25 Dec 2011 18:44:15 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 10:07:38 +0800, who where wrote:

The thinner you try and make the cable the greater the corners you
have to cut. But which of these do you reduce?
The sheath is important where (super)flat cable is to be run under
carpet, as is the conductor and insulation on each wire. No easy
answer.

Well, super flat uses #28 awg wire. Commodity CAT5 is #24 awg. CAT6
is #23 awg. The #28 awg isn't a problem unless you need to replace
the crimp on connector ends, or you need to run DC power through the
cable.

I've tried using flat (not super-flat) CAT5 under carpets. The stuff
rolls over as the rug moves and eventually creates a lump. Carpet
tape helps, but it still doesn't last. I recently received some flat
cable designed specifically for under the carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/ENG/1499119-Customer_Drawing-RevE.pdf
Note that it's #24 awg wire, which means it uses standard connectors.
I'll be replacing the lumpy CAT5 shortly and expect it to work better.
Note that I have to notch the wings in order to make a turn.

Tyco/Amp's catalog for under carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/UC_Comm_System_Booklet_Rev3.pdf

Thanks Jeff and Who. This is enough to decide what to buy, later
today after I do some other things. (I think any of them will work
well.)

On Sun, 25 Dec 2011 18:44:15 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 10:07:38 +0800, who where wrote:

The thinner you try and make the cable the greater the corners you
have to cut. But which of these do you reduce?
The sheath is important where (super)flat cable is to be run under
carpet, as is the conductor and insulation on each wire. No easy
answer.

Well, super flat uses #28 awg wire. Commodity CAT5 is #24 awg. CAT6
is #23 awg. The #28 awg isn't a problem unless you need to replace
the crimp on connector ends, or you need to run DC power through the
cable.

I've tried using flat (not super-flat) CAT5 under carpets. The stuff
rolls over as the rug moves and eventually creates a lump. Carpet
tape helps, but it still doesn't last.

Crikey! While I would contemplate flat-cat under carpet(*) (local
interpretation here is wall-to-wall and fixed with barbed
"smooth-edge" around perimeter) I'd never expect a satisfactory result
under a rug (loose piece of carpet). Your experience reinforces that.

I recently received some flat
cable designed specifically for under the carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/ENG/1499119-Customer_Drawing-RevE.pdf
Note that it's #24 awg wire, which means it uses standard connectors.
I'll be replacing the lumpy CAT5 shortly and expect it to work better.
Note that I have to notch the wings in order to make a turn.

Tyco/Amp's catalog for under carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/UC_Comm_System_Booklet_Rev3.pdf

Tnx for the link.

The application here was in a residence with solid brick walls, and
the need to get connection to an "island" section of inner wall
without cable running down a wall or around a skirting board, which
the client felt would be unsightly. Client also ruled out wireless.
These rooms were carpeted(*).

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:52:02 +0800, who where wrote:

The application here was in a residence with solid brick walls, and
the need to get connection to an "island" section of inner wall
without cable running down a wall or around a skirting board, which
the client felt would be unsightly. Client also ruled out wireless.
These rooms were carpeted(*).

Remove the baseboard trim (skirting board??), and mill a grove for the
flat or round wire behind it. The problem is that there's a danger of
someone pounding a brad or staple into the baseboard trim, and hitting
the cable.

It's really a pity that I can't find CAT5 with only two pairs of wires
in the cable. It would be about 66% of the diameter of the common
four pair CAT5.

You could also lift the carpet and route a shallow grove into the
plywood subfloor for the flat CAT5 cable. Subfloors are 0.75" to
1.25" thick. 0.100 isn't going to weaken the flooring. Glue in place
with hot melt glue. Fill the grove and cover with Fixall. Reinstall
carpet with a carpet kicker. (I haven't tried this but it should
work).

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 19:38:25 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:52:02 +0800, who where wrote:

The application here was in a residence with solid brick walls, and
the need to get connection to an "island" section of inner wall
without cable running down a wall or around a skirting board, which
the client felt would be unsightly. Client also ruled out wireless.
These rooms were carpeted(*).

It's really a pity that I can't find CAT5 with only two pairs of wires
in the cable. It would be about 66% of the diameter of the common
four pair CAT5.

If the client ever wanted Gigabit Ethernet to that island, they'd be
out of luck.

On Sun, 25 Dec 2011 18:44:15 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 10:07:38 +0800, who where wrote:

The thinner you try and make the cable the greater the corners you
have to cut. But which of these do you reduce?
The sheath is important where (super)flat cable is to be run under
carpet, as is the conductor and insulation on each wire. No easy
answer.

Well, super flat uses #28 awg wire. Commodity CAT5 is #24 awg. CAT6
is #23 awg. The #28 awg isn't a problem unless you need to replace
the crimp on connector ends, or you need to run DC power through the
cable.

I've tried using flat (not super-flat) CAT5 under carpets. The stuff
rolls over as the rug moves and eventually creates a lump. Carpet

I meant to say that one of those three companies I looked at said the
flat stuff had removeable edges, that could be used to staple the wire
to the floor. I'll check which brand said that if you want me too.

tape helps, but it still doesn't last. I recently received some flat
cable designed specifically for under the carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/ENG/1499119-Customer_Drawing-RevE.pdf
Note that it's #24 awg wire, which means it uses standard connectors.
I'll be replacing the lumpy CAT5 shortly and expect it to work better.
Note that I have to notch the wings in order to make a turn.

Tyco/Amp's catalog for under carpet installs:
http://www.ampnetconnect.com/documents/UC_Comm_System_Booklet_Rev3.pdf

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 01:03:29 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 19:38:25 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:52:02 +0800, who where wrote:

The application here was in a residence with solid brick walls, and
the need to get connection to an "island" section of inner wall
without cable running down a wall or around a skirting board, which
the client felt would be unsightly. Client also ruled out wireless.
These rooms were carpeted(*).

It's really a pity that I can't find CAT5 with only two pairs of wires
in the cable. It would be about 66% of the diameter of the common
four pair CAT5.

If the client ever wanted Gigabit Ethernet to that island, they'd be
out of luck.

True. The choice is fat cable, flat cable, or living with 100baseT.
If the kitchen island computer is for grabbing recipies, then 100baseT
should be adequate.

I'm wondering how the "island" is getting its AC power. Whatever
route was used, might be paralleled with a network cable or conduit.
If the floor is poured concrete, it's not going to happen. However,
if it does have AC power, then perhaps a power line network (HomePlug)
might be an easier fix. (Yeah, it's slow). If money is of no
concern, just run fiber under the carpet, add two expensive media
converters at each end, and be done with it.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 19:38:25 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:52:02 +0800, who where wrote:

The application here was in a residence with solid brick walls, and
the need to get connection to an "island" section of inner wall
without cable running down a wall or around a skirting board, which
the client felt would be unsightly. Client also ruled out wireless.
These rooms were carpeted(*).

Remove the baseboard trim (skirting board??), and mill a grove for the
flat or round wire behind it.

The target is an island section, so that won't achieve anything.

You could also lift the carpet and route a shallow grove into the
plywood subfloor for the flat CAT5 cable. Subfloors are 0.75" to
1.25" thick. 0.100 isn't going to weaken the flooring.

Just to clarify, the building construction is brick on concrete floor
slab. Power to the island section is via conduit through the slab.
You guys obviously use different construction materials/ methods ;-)

The option with the least impact was superflat under the carpet's foam
underlay. There had been serious thought to chasing a conduit down
the wall but that would have been both disruptive to the workstation
and $$$. There was but a passing mention of EoP.

On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:44:54 +0800, who where wrote:

Just to clarify, the building construction is brick on concrete floor
slab. Power to the island section is via conduit through the slab.
You guys obviously use different construction materials/ methods ;-)

I live in a forest, where houses tend to made from wood. The big tree
roots tend to make houses move around, so concrete slab foundations
are not very popular (except when they can located on a sand pile).

Yeah, notching the concrete floor isn't going to work. Sorry(tm).

The option with the least impact was superflat under the carpet's foam
underlay. There had been serious thought to chasing a conduit down
the wall but that would have been both disruptive to the workstation
and $$$. There was but a passing mention of EoP.

Going through the foam pad under the carpet will work. If thick
enough, you might be able to use real CAT5.

What's EoP? Ethernet over Plumbing? If you can run fiber optic cable
throught the sewers, you might be able to run fiber through the drains
or water pipes. The fiber is easy, but the fiber to ethernet media
converters are expensive.

If the island has power, you might consider power line networking
(HomePlug).

Another possible is Multimedia over Coax:
http://www.mocalliance.org
Instead of the common RG-6a/u coax cable, use some really thin coax,
such as RG-179b/u coax (0.100" OD). Use MoCA bridges on each side of
the coax run. Or, if you can live with only 10Mbits/sec, use 50 ohm
coax, such as RG-174/u (0.100" OD) and an old 10base2 hub as a media
converter.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 20:14:57 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:44:54 +0800, who where wrote:

Just to clarify, the building construction is brick on concrete floor
slab. Power to the island section is via conduit through the slab.
You guys obviously use different construction materials/ methods ;-)

I live in a forest, where houses tend to made from wood. The big tree
roots tend to make houses move around, so concrete slab foundations
are not very popular (except when they can located on a sand pile).

This is in suburbia, where the norm (at least here) is slab on
compacted sand. If big tree roots cause a problem, that is the
owner's concern, but practically none of the indigenous species cause
this type of problem. The fig family of course is another story.

Yeah, notching the concrete floor isn't going to work. Sorry(tm).

The option with the least impact was superflat under the carpet's foam
underlay. There had been serious thought to chasing a conduit down
the wall but that would have been both disruptive to the workstation
and $$$. There was but a passing mention of EoP.

Going through the foam pad under the carpet will work. If thick
enough, you might be able to use real CAT5.

The foam is a Bridgestone product. It starts life around 1cm thick
but compresses down with use to probably 4mm. Ratjher than trying to
notch/groove it, going under it is a lot less work and the result -
apart from being undetectable - is very well protected even against
wheeled/dragged loads which can ripple the carpet.

What's EoP? Ethernet over Plumbing?

Ethernet over power. "Reverse" of PoE.

If you can run fiber optic cable
throught the sewers, you might be able to run fiber through the drains
or water pipes. The fiber is easy, but the fiber to ethernet media
converters are expensive.

If the island has power, you might consider power line networking
(HomePlug).

See EoP above. But no services other than AC power.

Another possible is Multimedia over Coax:
http://www.mocalliance.org
Instead of the common RG-6a/u coax cable, use some really thin coax,
such as RG-179b/u coax (0.100" OD). Use MoCA bridges on each side of
the coax run. Or, if you can live with only 10Mbits/sec, use 50 ohm
coax, such as RG-174/u (0.100" OD) and an old 10base2 hub as a media
converter.

There's plenty of 10base2 stuff available, but the speed compromise
compared to Cat5E and the simplicity of the flat-cat would have ruled
it out had we even considered it.

But yes, there a multitude of ways to skin that cat (ouch!) Superflat
Cat5/5E under the carpet works best in terms of speed and cost.

In message , micky
writes
Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

The short answer is 'probably'. After all, if you are on an old type of
phone system, a twin wire phone line has brought the DSL signal all the
way from the exchange to your house. Another 50 feet isn't really going
to make a lot of difference.
--
Ian

On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 23:37:51 +0000, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , micky
writes
Will flat, modular, outsde the wall phone wire run DSL for 50 feet?
Or do I need thicker wire?

The short answer is 'probably'. After all, if you are on an old type of
phone system, a twin wire phone line has brought the DSL signal all the
way from the exchange to your house. Another 50 feet isn't really going
to make a lot of difference.

Apparently the problem wasn't the twin wire, but the thin wire.
Replacing it with round four-conductor 4-color wire (using only 2 of
them) , (that I got out of the trash 20 or 30 years ago) actually a
piece 10 or 20 feet longer than I took out, more than tripled my
download speed.

The Verizon guy had told me that the special under the carpet (but not
Cat-5, just wire) 4-conductor wire was no good.

I taped the space around the window, and II still haven't bought the
flat CAT-5 for some reason.

P&M