When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Thanks

Edward

wrote in message
...
When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Thanks

Edward

Are you using crossover patch cables ?

wrote
When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Thanks

Edward

When you plugged the laptop into the router direct, did you use one of the
patch leads or another cable?
Just a check to make sure you haven't got "cross-over" cable by mistake for
the patch leads.

Phil

In article
,
wrote:
When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Experienced engineer or not he's made a cock up?

Here's the correct wiring:-

http://www.jaysafe.co.uk/technical/rj45.asp

Just a thought - have you got face plates either end with jumpers to the
router?

--
*Great groups from little icons grow *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:49:50 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article
,
wrote:
When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran the
cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat there
for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend who is
an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to install the
face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual points
and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the wires
were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and, as I
say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's unshielded
twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Experienced engineer or not he's made a cock up?

Here's the correct wiring:-

http://www.jaysafe.co.uk/technical/rj45.asp

Just a thought - have you got face plates either end with jumpers to the
router?

Looks like it from his diagram. As long as the colours each end of a
cable and on both ends of the faceplates are the same it should 'work',
although using the proper EIA/TIA 568 A or B colour coding will give you
much better range and lower crosstalk figures.

None of the cables in the system should be 'crossover' types, although
the majority of routers now have MDI/MDIX ports that can automatically
cope with straight or crossover anyway.

If a network engineer did the faceplates and the cables came from work
then both of those should be OK. That leaves the cables.

Cat-5 is sturdy enough, but probably a bit lighter than your sparks was
used to, especially since they are almost certainly solid core. Putting
too tight bends or bending them too often could get you snapped cores.
But again, you say the network tester said it was OK. (Aside: if anybody
needs one, try this - it's simple but it works well and costs almost
nothing:
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.4439)

So if all the wiring is OK, that leaves... nothing.

With the laptop plugged into a faceplate, can you ping the routers IP
address?

Is the four way faceplate fully wired into the router, or do you just
have a couple of cables? Are you sure the right sockets are connected all
the way back to the router?

When you plug the laptop in, does the 'link light' come on (usually a
green led on the rj45 socket on the laptop, and another on the router?)

In article , urd3
@bitrot.co.uk says...


Cat-5 is sturdy enough, but probably a bit lighter than your sparks was
used to, especially since they are almost certainly solid core. Putting
too tight bends or bending them too often could get you snapped cores.
But again, you say the network tester said it was OK. (Aside: if anybody
needs one, try this - it's simple but it works well and costs almost
nothing:
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.4439)

So if all the wiring is OK, that leaves... nothing.

Except for the problem already identified in this thread...

That type of tester will only tell if you have random wires on the same
pins at each end, not whether you have use the correct wires from the
twisted pairs onto the correct socket pins. It indicats all is fine if
the cable is basic muti-wire alarm cable instead of Cat5

The place I used to work was wired using Cat5. (As a foreigner by a
local BT installer.) He had installed the pairs 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 & 7-8,
which would have been fine on your tester. It worked until we started
using 100Mbps and auto speed detect devices...
--
John W
To mail me replace the obvious with co.uk twice

On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:43:29 GMT, PCPaul wrote:

(Aside: if anybody needs one, try this - it's simple but it works well
and costs almost nothing:
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.4439)

It is almost certainly the limitations of such cheap testers that caused
the confusion about this install in the first place. The correct pins are
wired to the correct pins but with the same wiring error at each end. Thus
the signals between the two sockets are not being sent over the twisted
pairs of wires which is essential for the connection to work.

I hope that the "installation engineer" that did this work has learnt
something from his reliance on his cheap tester...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 12:16:18 +0100, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:43:29 GMT, PCPaul wrote:

(Aside: if anybody needs one, try this - it's simple but it works well
and costs almost nothing:
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.4439)

It is almost certainly the limitations of such cheap testers that caused
the confusion about this install in the first place. The correct pins
are wired to the correct pins but with the same wiring error at each
end. Thus the signals between the two sockets are not being sent over
the twisted pairs of wires which is essential for the connection to
work.

I hope that the "installation engineer" that did this work has learnt
something from his reliance on his cheap tester...

The perils of answering before reading the whole thread...

Oh well, I do use a TDR for work testing and only use the cheapo for home
jobs.. and I've never had the same colour swapping problem that this one
turned out to be. Found plenty of bad connections and shorts with a
cheapy tester, which TBH in a circuit that 'used to work' is all that's
likely to happen.

I have seen some cables with such small dabs of such faint colours that
it was hard to figure out which was which without following it back to
the twisted bits, though.

In article ,
wrote:
When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Get him back in...

(But by posting here, I'm guessing that might not be an option!)

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

As others have said it might be that you're used cross-over cables,
however every router I've seen recently has auto cross-over ports now,
so it's unlikely that would cause a problem.

There are 2 "standards" for wiring cat-5 cable though - maybe he's using
one and your patch leads use the other?

Gordon

"
There are 2 "standards" for wiring cat-5 cable though - maybe he's using
one and your patch leads use the other?


That doesn't matter.
So long as the wiring within a cable is the same at either end, then you can
mix A and B patch leads and fixed wiring.
A patch-lead or fixed wiring terminated using A at one end and B at the
other will be a crossover cable.

The only diff is that the TX will be carried on the orange pair over one
section, and the green pair over the next.
And the RX will be carried over the green pair on one section, and the
orange pair over the next.

The electrons are colour-blind.

So long as 1+2 are a twisted pair, and 3+6 are a twised pair, the actual
colours used are irrelevant.

--
Ron

wrote in message
...
When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Thanks

Edward


In addition to what the others have said ( incorrect patch cables ); can you
unscrew the face-plates, and either take a picture or describe what wires
have been punched down into which terminals?

I'd expect it to be:

1 Orange / White
2 Solid Orange
3 Green / White
4 Solid Blue
5 Blue / White
6 Solid Green
7 Brown / White
8 Solid Brown

( The Orange twisted pair may be swapped withthe Green twisted pair on some
installations, that's OK )

What's important it the twisted pairs.
One pair ( usually orange ) is used for pins 1+2.
Another pair ( usually green ) is used for pins 3+6.
This is critical.
The blue pair and brown pair are only used on gigabit and / or PoE systems,
but these are becoming commonplace, and should be wired up correctly too.

A common wiring error is to use one pair for 1+2,
another for 3+4, another for 5+6, another for 7+8.
This will not work properly.

It is essential that one twisted pair is used for 3+6, as described above.

--
Ron

On 17 Sep, 17:10, "Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS
wrote:
wrote in message

...





When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. *Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. *I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. *Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. *A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. *However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? *I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Thanks

Edward

In addition to what the others have said ( incorrect patch cables ); can you
unscrew the face-plates, and either take a picture or describe what wires
have been punched down into which terminals?

I'd expect it to be:

1 Orange / White
2 Solid Orange
3 Green / White
4 Solid Blue
5 Blue / White
6 Solid Green
7 Brown / White
8 Solid Brown

( The Orange twisted pair may be swapped withthe Green twisted pair on some
installations, that's OK )

What's important it the twisted pairs.
One pair ( usually orange ) is used for pins 1+2.
Another pair ( usually green ) is used for pins 3+6.
This is critical.
The blue pair and brown pair are only used on gigabit and / or PoE systems,
but these are becoming commonplace, and should be wired up correctly too.

A common wiring error is to use one pair for 1+2,
another for 3+4, another for 5+6, another for 7+8.
This will not work properly.

It is essential that one twisted pair is used for 3+6, as described above..

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

Edward

gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

A two-second google finds...
http://pinouts.ru/connectors/rj45m.gif

On 18 Sep, 09:55, Adrian wrote:
gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. *I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

A two-second google finds...http://pinouts.ru/connectors/rj45m.gif

Ah, but that's the cable. I need the socket.

Edward

gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. Â*I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

A two-second google finds...http://pinouts.ru/connectors/rj45m.gif

Ah, but that's the cable.

No, it's the plug. You've already been given the colour codes for the
cable that correspond with which socket pin.

I need the socket.

holds head in hands
D'you think that pin 1 on the cable might correspond to pin 1 on the
socket...?

In article
,
wrote:
The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

The URL I gave shows this.

--
*Hard work pays off in the future. Laziness pays off now *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
wrote:
The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

The URL I gave shows this.

Another very good site for pinouts of just about everything:

http://www.hardwarebook.info/


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article ,
John Rumm wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
wrote:
The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

The URL I gave shows this.

Another very good site for pinouts of just about everything:

http://www.hardwarebook.info/

Excellent resource - thanks.

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

wrote:

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. *I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

Most sockets have numbered and colour coded labels beside the connectors.
It's a bit hard to identify the labels from your rather dark photo but I've
put a copy on http://www.milibyte.co.uk/socket.jpg with the levels
adjusted to make things more visible. The wires obscure most of the labels
and numbers but it looks like the terminals are numbered and the colour
codes for both EIA 568A and 568B are shown. The connections should follow
one of these colour schemes, i.e. terminals 1 & 2 (top right) should be
either the green pair or the orange pair. If you use the orange pair on 1 &
2 then the green pair should go to 3 & 6, which I think is the bottom left.

My guess is that things should work if you offer your mate a pint to come
back with his punchdown tool and swap the green/white and orange/white
striped wires. But poke around among the wires first to see the numbers to
check this.

--
Mike Clarke

wrote:

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. *I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

From Mike's picture. it looks more like phone cable than cat5e to me but
that could be because all the twists have been undone - but they don't
look tightly twisted back at the insulation cut - is it really Cat5e
cable?

I'm now sure the pairs are split onto the incorrect pins of the socket.
I can see the "1" by the wh/gr and I can't work out how the opposite
corner connector could be the other half of the pair.

I suggest you get your friend back, asking him to do it properly and
show him http://www.surrey.ac.uk/eng/Intranet...upport/UTP.HTM The
wiring of the socket is at the top. (and you'd think someone at
surrey.ac.uk would spell correctly...) Don't forget to check he cuts off
the tiny piece of each wire at the end that was used in the punch-down
connector, so he is connecting to a fresh piece of wire - and get him to
fit a tie-wrap as a strain relief.
--
John W
To mail me replace the obvious with co.uk twice

wrote in message
...

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

The photo has pin numbers/colours on.
I can't see them very well because of all the wires.
You could post a pic of each end if they are different.

wrote:

The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket. I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

With RJ45 the pin numbers on the socket match those of the plug (unlike
say the BT phone plug!). However, that is not usually particularly
useful information since the presentation of the IDC terminals will vary
in layout depending on both brand and type of socket. So you need to
follow the colour code on the particular socket.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Ron Lowe wrote:



In addition to what the others have said ( incorrect patch cables ); can
you unscrew the face-plates, and either take a picture or describe what
wires have been punched down into which terminals?

I'd expect it to be:

1 Orange / White
2 Solid Orange
3 Green / White
4 Solid Blue
5 Blue / White
6 Solid Green
7 Brown / White
8 Solid Brown


Er, well then, you'd be wrong to expect that.

The TIA 568B standard (almost universal for UK structured cabling
installations) for an RJ45 connector is based upon the Western Electric
Colour Code, as follows

1. White/Orange
2. Orange or Orange/White
3. White/Green
4. Blue or Blue/White
5. White/Blue
6. Green or Green/White
7. White/Brown
8. Brown or Brown/White

In all cases where two colours are shown, the first colour is the main
colour and the second colour is the tracer (or stripe) colour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIA-568B

Dave Osborne wrote:
Ron Lowe wrote:



In addition to what the others have said ( incorrect patch cables );
can you unscrew the face-plates, and either take a picture or describe
what wires have been punched down into which terminals?

I'd expect it to be:

1 Orange / White
2 Solid Orange
3 Green / White
4 Solid Blue
5 Blue / White
6 Solid Green
7 Brown / White
8 Solid Brown


Er, well then, you'd be wrong to expect that.

The TIA 568B standard (almost universal for UK structured cabling
installations) for an RJ45 connector is based upon the Western Electric
Colour Code, as follows

1. White/Orange
2. Orange or Orange/White
3. White/Green
4. Blue or Blue/White
5. White/Blue
6. Green or Green/White
7. White/Brown
8. Brown or Brown/White

In all cases where two colours are shown, the first colour is the main
colour and the second colour is the tracer (or stripe) colour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIA-568B

However the latter differs from the former only in the sense of colors.
As far as the electricals go, it's pairs in the right pairs of
terminals, so will work just as well.

AS I said before' all that matters is a pair on 1 nd 2, a pair on 3 and
6, a pair on 4 and 5 and a pair on 7 and 8. Which way round they are, or
what colors they use, are actually not a problem.

In fact for ethernet up to 100Mbps,only 3 and 6, and 4 and 5 need be
connected at all..

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...


In fact for ethernet up to 100Mbps,only 3 and 6, and 4 and 5 need be
connected at all..




Completely WRONG ( (copyright) TNP )

ITYM 1+2, and 3+6.

How can you have managed all these years, getting it wrong every single
time? :-)

-
Ron

Ron Lowe wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...


In fact for ethernet up to 100Mbps,only 3 and 6, and 4 and 5 need be
connected at all..




Completely WRONG ( (copyright) TNP )

ITYM 1+2, and 3+6.

How can you have managed all these years, getting it wrong every single
time? :-)


Ah, you may be right..after the first time when I actually taught some
people who did wiring how to do it, I employed them to do it every time.

And promptly forgot 90%.



-
Ron

wrote:

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. *A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. *However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

It would be interesting to know the make and model of the router. Others
have suggested this might be due to the use of a crossover lead but most
recent models should automatically compensate for transposed Tx and Rx
lines. If this is the case then it wouldn't matter of one lead was a
crossover anyway.

When you connect over the LAN there's 2 fly leads involved, one from the
laptop to the individual faceplate and and another from the 4 gang
faceplate to the router. Have you tested each lead individually, i.e.
connect the laptop directly to the router with each one in turn.

--
Mike Clarke

On Sep 17, 5:28*pm, Mike Clarke wrote:
wrote:
Unfortunately the network doesn't work. *A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. *However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

It would be interesting to know the make and model of the router. Others
have suggested this might be due to the use of a crossover lead but most
recent models should automatically compensate for transposed Tx and Rx
lines. If this is the case then it wouldn't matter of one lead was a
crossover anyway.

When you connect over the LAN there's 2 fly leads involved, one from the
laptop to the individual faceplate and and another from the 4 gang
faceplate to the router. Have you tested each lead individually, i.e.
connect the laptop directly to the router with each one in turn.

Thanks for all your thoughts. Replies below:

Yes, I've tested each lead individually. Well, I've swapped them
around and they all allow the laptop to connect directly to the
router. I don't know if they're crossover patch cables or not - one
says "CAT 5 PATCH CABLE UTP", the other says, amongst other things,
"VERIFIED TIA/EIA 568A CAT 5 PATCH"

The router is a Netgear ADSL Firewall Router DG834. DCHP is on,
natch.

A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/

The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are

Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White

The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.

Thanks

Edward

A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is he
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/

The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are

Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White

The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.

Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
You need to look at the labeling under the wires.

Pin 1 is green/white.
Pin 2 is orange.

That's all wrong.
The pairs are all messed up.

You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as everyone
has indicated. Use the colour codes I listed.

Check both ends.

--
Ron

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message
...
A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is he
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/

The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are

Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White

The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.

Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
You need to look at the labeling under the wires.

Pin 1 is green/white.
Pin 2 is orange.

That's all wrong.
The pairs are all messed up.

You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as everyone
has indicated. Use the colour codes I listed.

Check both ends.

--
Ron




To be more specific, it looks like the Orange/white and Green/white are
swapped.

Again, check all outlets, both ends.

--
Ron

On Sep 17, 6:31*pm, "Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS
wrote:
"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message

...





A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is he
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/

The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are

Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White

The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.

Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
You need to look at the labeling under the wires.

Pin 1 is green/white.
Pin 2 is orange.

That's all wrong.
The pairs are all messed up.

You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as everyone
has indicated. * Use the colour codes I listed.

Check both ends.

--
Ron

To be more specific, it looks like the Orange/white and Green/white are
swapped.

Again, check all outlets, both ends.

I have a problem with this problem, conceptually.

When I plug my laptop directly into the router, the patch cable
carries the signal directly along the cable according to how the patch
cable is wired.

However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?

See this diagram that will probably only confuse the issue

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2866137802/

Edward

wrote:

The router is a Netgear ADSL Firewall Router DG834.

The DG834 has "Auto Uplink" ports which means that it eliminates the need to
worry about crossover cables. It will accommodate either type of cable and
make the appropriate internal adjustments automatically to make the right
connection.

As others have said, it looks like you just need to get the fixed wiring
sorted to ensure the wires are paired off in the right order.

--
Mike Clarke

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:27:59 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

If the laptop works plugged directly into any of the router ports I'd
get the wiring and socket outlets checked again. You can make a cheap
test kit by cutting a patch cable in two and shorting out each twisted
pair. Plug it in and stick the other half in the appropriate socket
and use a continuity tester on each twisted pair on that cable. Either
you have faulty wiring connections or the sockets are duff. That does
happen. I have two needing replacement ATM because the RJ45 plug
waggles about in them.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:29:27 +0100, Alang
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:27:59 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

If the laptop works plugged directly into any of the router ports I'd
get the wiring and socket outlets checked again. You can make a cheap
test kit by cutting a patch cable in two and shorting out each twisted
pair. Plug it in and stick the other half in the appropriate socket
and use a continuity tester on each twisted pair on that cable. Either
you have faulty wiring connections or the sockets are duff. That does
happen. I have two needing replacement ATM because the RJ45 plug
waggles about in them.

Can I ask something relevant to this ..Why is there a 4 way box
between the router and the faceplates .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

Could the length(s) of Cat 5 cable not have been taken from the
router straight to each of the faceplates instaed of using the patch
cables . ?

On Sep 17, 6:58*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:29:27 +0100, Alang
wrote:





On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:27:59 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. *Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. *I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. *Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. *A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. *However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? *I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

If the laptop works plugged directly into any of the router ports I'd
get the wiring and socket outlets checked again. *You can make a cheap
test kit by cutting a patch cable in two and shorting out each twisted
pair. Plug it in and stick the other half in the appropriate socket
and use a continuity tester on each twisted pair on that cable. Either
you have faulty wiring connections or the sockets are duff. That does
happen. I have two needing replacement ATM because the RJ45 plug
waggles about in them. *

Can I ask something relevant to this ..Why is there a 4 way box
between the router and the faceplates .http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

*Could the length(s) *of Cat 5 cable not have been taken from the
router straight to each of the faceplates instaed of using the patch
cables . ? *

The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang. The individual 1-
gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house. The
way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.

Edward

wrote:

The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang. The individual 1-
gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house. The
way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.

Could have been much simpler to simply run a single wire from the router
to a network switch which these days are cheap as chips for an 8 port.
Unless of course there was nowhere to plug a network switch in where you
have the connection box.

:¬)

--
http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk - Fitness+Gym Equipment.
http://www.bodysolid-gym-equipment.co.uk
http://www.trade-price-supplements.co.uk
http://www.water-rower.co.uk

On Sep 17, 7:28*pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
wrote:
wrote:
The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang. *The individual 1-
gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house. *The
way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.

Could have been much simpler to simply run a single wire from the router
to a network switch which these days are cheap as chips for an 8 port.
Unless of course there was nowhere to plug a network switch in where you
have the connection box.

Um, what's a network switch?

Edward

wrote in message
...
When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN. Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop. I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is he

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected. Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work. A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network. However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts? I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Thanks


One obvious answer is that you have patch leads with cross-overs in them.
Assuming you haven't checked this, get two leads that work connecting the
laptop into the router and use one of these as a patch lead. If you have
already tried this or it still fails, maybe there's a crossover in the
installed cables - try a patch lead with a crossover! Otherwise, in spite of
his test, the cabling isn't correct.


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

Bob Mannix wrote:

One obvious answer is that you have patch leads with cross-overs in them.

No, we've eliminated that one. His Netgear DG834 has autosensing ports that
can cope with this.

--
Mike Clarke

On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:14:41 UTC, Mike Clarke
wrote:

Bob Mannix wrote:

One obvious answer is that you have patch leads with cross-overs in them.

No, we've eliminated that one. His Netgear DG834 has autosensing ports that
can cope with this.

But does the PC at the other end of the circuit?

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com