There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on
a shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on
one faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of
wiring a socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then
connecting a patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

If so, what is the colour-coding to use?

Thanks.

On 10/06/2015 13:56, Adam Funk wrote:
There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on
a shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on
one faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of
wiring a socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then
connecting a patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

You can, although it makes it a little less flexible in use, and you
also need to take care that you don't move the connections about too
much since the solid core wiring cable does not last as well with
repeated flexing as the stranded patch lead stuff.

You can in theory get special RJ45s designed for solid core, but I have
never had any problem with "normal" ones on solid core cable in
applications were its mostly going to be plugged in and left.

If so, what is the colour-coding to use?

Stick to TIA 568B in most cases (unless your sockets are only colour
coded for A). Most are marked with both colours, although B only ones
are becoming more common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIA/EIA-568#Wiring


--
Cheers,

John.

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

Adam Funk wrote:

is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

It's not impossible, but you're looking for a mixture of bits, normally
sockets expect solid core cable, and plugs expect stranded core flexible
cable.

Using flex in the krone punch-down of a socket *will* be unreliable
(been there had to fix someone else's ****-up) you can get plugs for
solid cable, but they're a little harder to come by, or you can get
plugs that claim to work with both solid and flex.

Adam Funk wrote:
There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on
a shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on
one faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of
wiring a socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then
connecting a patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

Others will answer on the practical aspects of doing what you ask, but
I'd stick with the two-socket approach, unless there was a really
pressing reason not to have a second socket.

--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

On 10/06/15 14:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Adam Funk wrote:

is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

It's not impossible, but you're looking for a mixture of bits, normally
sockets expect solid core cable, and plugs expect stranded core flexible
cable.

Using flex in the krone punch-down of a socket *will* be unreliable
(been there had to fix someone else's ****-up) you can get plugs for
solid cable, but they're a little harder to come by, or you can get
plugs that claim to work with both solid and flex.

And the first time it takes you an hour to find the fault, you will
resolve never to do it again



--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On 10/06/2015 16:28, Mike Barnes wrote:
Adam Funk wrote:
There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on
a shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on
one faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of
wiring a socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then
connecting a patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

Others will answer on the practical aspects of doing what you ask, but
I'd stick with the two-socket approach, unless there was a really
pressing reason not to have a second socket.

+1 The socket and patch cable approach is more reliable and far easier
to fix if a problem does develop.

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 16:28:14 +0100, Mike Barnes wrote:

Adam Funk wrote:
There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on a
shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on one
faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of wiring a
socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then connecting a
patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to just put an RJ45
plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket on the other end?

Others will answer on the practical aspects of doing what you ask, but
I'd stick with the two-socket approach, unless there was a really
pressing reason not to have a second socket.

You could do both sockets outside the cabinet and just cross-wire there.

Get a double box that holds two single sockets and it can look quite neat:

http://cpc.farnell.com/pro-elec/8282...2mm/dp/PL10042

Just make a hole between the two halves for the link cable. Solid core
naturally.

On 2015-06-10, Bob Eager wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 16:28:14 +0100, Mike Barnes wrote:

Adam Funk wrote:
There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on a
shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on one
faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of wiring a
socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then connecting a
patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to just put an RJ45
plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket on the other end?

Others will answer on the practical aspects of doing what you ask, but
I'd stick with the two-socket approach, unless there was a really
pressing reason not to have a second socket.

Based on what I've read here, I now agree.

You could do both sockets outside the cabinet and just cross-wire there.

That would involve having a patch cable running out under the wardrobe
door. (Maybe I didn't make it clear, but the router is on a shelf
inside a built-in wardrobe & the socket position is on a wall just
outside the wardrobe.)

On 2015-06-10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 10/06/15 14:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Adam Funk wrote:

is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

It's not impossible, but you're looking for a mixture of bits, normally
sockets expect solid core cable, and plugs expect stranded core flexible
cable.

Using flex in the krone punch-down of a socket *will* be unreliable
(been there had to fix someone else's ****-up) you can get plugs for
solid cable, but they're a little harder to come by, or you can get
plugs that claim to work with both solid and flex.

And the first time it takes you an hour to find the fault, you will
resolve never to do it again

Point taken!

On 2015-06-10, John Rumm wrote:

On 10/06/2015 13:56, Adam Funk wrote:
There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on
a shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on
one faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of
wiring a socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then
connecting a patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

You can, although it makes it a little less flexible in use, and you
also need to take care that you don't move the connections about too
much since the solid core wiring cable does not last as well with
repeated flexing as the stranded patch lead stuff.

You can in theory get special RJ45s designed for solid core, but I have
never had any problem with "normal" ones on solid core cable in
applications were its mostly going to be plugged in and left.

That's an interesting point ... as it happens, I've been using the
same cable for some socket-to-socket connections & 1 patch cable where
I needed a strange length.


If so, what is the colour-coding to use?

Stick to TIA 568B in most cases (unless your sockets are only colour
coded for A). Most are marked with both colours, although B only ones
are becoming more common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIA/EIA-568#Wiring

B is what I've been using. Thanks (to others as well) for the advice
--- I'll just put a socket on both sides of the wall (1 inside, 1
outside the wardrobe/network-cabinet) & connect them the usual way.

On 10/06/2015 22:15, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2015-06-10, John Rumm wrote:

On 10/06/2015 13:56, Adam Funk wrote:
There's a phone socket on the wall just outside the "networking
cupboard" at home (well, built-in wardrobe with the router & modem on
a shelf). I'd like to change it to a double --- phone beside RJ45 on
one faceplate & connect the RJ45 to the router inside. Instead of
wiring a socket on the wall to a socket inside the cupboard, then
connecting a patch cable to the router, is there any reason not to
just put an RJ45 plug on one end of a piece of cable & the RJ45 socket
on the other end?

You can, although it makes it a little less flexible in use, and you
also need to take care that you don't move the connections about too
much since the solid core wiring cable does not last as well with
repeated flexing as the stranded patch lead stuff.

You can in theory get special RJ45s designed for solid core, but I have
never had any problem with "normal" ones on solid core cable in
applications were its mostly going to be plugged in and left.

That's an interesting point ... as it happens, I've been using the
same cable for some socket-to-socket connections & 1 patch cable where
I needed a strange length.


If so, what is the colour-coding to use?

Stick to TIA 568B in most cases (unless your sockets are only colour
coded for A). Most are marked with both colours, although B only ones
are becoming more common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIA/EIA-568#Wiring

B is what I've been using. Thanks (to others as well) for the advice
--- I'll just put a socket on both sides of the wall (1 inside, 1
outside the wardrobe/network-cabinet) & connect them the usual way.


Or use a small patch panel - then you always have expansion room.

--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:15:02 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:

If so, what is the colour-coding to use?

Stick to TIA 568B in most cases (unless your sockets are only
colour
coded for A). Most are marked with both colours, although B only
ones
are becoming more common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIA/EIA-568#Wiring

B is what I've been using.

Provided you stick with same both ends it doesn't matter the mapping
of pairs to pin numbers is the same for A or B. It's only the mapping
of colours to pins that changes and I'm pretty sure the electrons
don't care about insulation colour (Russ Andrews' universe excepted).

A cable with A one end and B the other is a cross over cable
sometimes useful if you want to connect two bit's of kit that would
normally connect to a switch. Not often needed these days as the kit
can work out that the pair swap is needed and do it itself.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 2015-06-11, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:15:02 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:

If so, what is the colour-coding to use?

Stick to TIA 568B in most cases (unless your sockets are only
colour
coded for A). Most are marked with both colours, although B only
ones
are becoming more common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIA/EIA-568#Wiring

B is what I've been using.

Provided you stick with same both ends it doesn't matter the mapping
of pairs to pin numbers is the same for A or B. It's only the mapping
of colours to pins that changes and I'm pretty sure the electrons
don't care about insulation colour (Russ Andrews' universe excepted).

I suspected that, but I figure I'm better off being consistent.

A cable with A one end and B the other is a cross over cable
sometimes useful if you want to connect two bit's of kit that would
normally connect to a switch. Not often needed these days as the kit
can work out that the pair swap is needed and do it itself.

Right.

On 10 Jun 2015 18:51:56 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:



You could do both sockets outside the cabinet and just cross-wire there.

Get a double box that holds two single sockets and it can look quite neat:

http://cpc.farnell.com/pro-elec/8282...2mm/dp/PL10042

Just make a hole between the two halves for the link cable. Solid core
naturally.

Or use something like:
https://www.claritybroadband.co.uk/t...ox_modules.htm