I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

Cheers


Dave R

--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

David wrote:

I'm planning to move the main router across the room

By altering the phone line wiring, or the ethernet wiring?

On 19/06/2019 13:18, David wrote:
I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

Cheers


Dave R


You only need to connect 2 pairs if it is CAT5E ethernet.

I suspect, even a cheapo choc-block would work.

There is of course the wireless option :-)

Andrew wrote:

You only need to connect 2 pairs if it is CAT5E ethernet.

True for 10 or 100Mbps ethernet, but not for 1Gbps ethernet or faster.

On 19/06/2019 13:40, Andrew wrote:

You only need to connect 2 pairs if it is CAT5E ethernet.

Doesn't 1G ethernet require 4 pairs?


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 19/06/2019 13:49, Andy Burns wrote:
Andrew wrote:

You only need to connect 2 pairs if it is CAT5E ethernet.

True for 10 or 100Mbps ethernet, but not for 1Gbps ethernet or faster.

Really ?. I thought only cat6 needed all four pairs ?.

In article ,
David wrote:
I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

I'd simply twist and sleeve. Maintaining each twisted pair as well as
possible. And that's free. ;-)

--
*Aim Low, Reach Your Goals, Avoid Disappointment *

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

On 19/06/2019 14:41, Andrew wrote:
On 19/06/2019 13:49, Andy Burns wrote:
Andrew wrote:

You only need to connect 2 pairs if it is CAT5E ethernet.

True for 10 or 100Mbps ethernet, but not for 1Gbps ethernet or faster.

Really ?. I thought only cat6 needed all four pairs ?.


No, Gigabit requires all 4 pairs, regardless of the cable spec.

On 19/06/2019 13:18, David wrote:
I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

Cheers


Dave R

Technically, you shouldn't join CAT5 in that way, but it will be fine.

On 19/06/2019 14:10, alan_m wrote:
On 19/06/2019 13:40, Andrew wrote:

You only need to connect 2 pairs if it is CAT5E ethernet.

Doesn't 1G ethernet require 4 pairs?



There is at least one standard that works over two pairsbut it has
limited range and I have never seen it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabit_Ethernet

dennis@home wrote:

There is at least one standard that works over two pairsbut it has
limited range and I have never seen it.

Similarly there was an early 100Mb ethernet standard (namely 100BASE-T4)
that required four pairs, I only own one device that uses it, and never
had anything else to connect it to, so used its 10Mb port instead.

On 19/06/2019 13:18, David wrote:
I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?


See no reason why that wouldnt work, though for gigabit speeds its
better to run a new cable

Stick RJ45 on each end..

Looks pretty straight forward.

Cheers


Dave R



--
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale
returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

Mark Twain

On 19/06/2019 14:41, Andrew wrote:
On 19/06/2019 13:49, Andy Burns wrote:
Andrew wrote:

You only need to connect 2 pairs if it is CAT5E ethernet.

True for 10 or 100Mbps ethernet, but not for 1Gbps ethernet or faster.

Really ?. I thought only cat6 needed all four pairs ?.


No Gigabit uses all pairs



--
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale
returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

Mark Twain

On 19/06/2019 13:18, David wrote:
I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

Yup, they work and are fine at 1 Gbps - I had to use a few here and
there when altering my structured wiring system.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 13:31:10 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

David wrote:

I'm planning to move the main router across the room

By altering the phone line wiring, or the ethernet wiring?

The Internet connection doesn't use a phone line.




I have VM cable so the cable needs moving but it is already clipped to the
skirting and just needs unclipping part way and coiling.

The phone line will need similar treatment.

Both come from the front of the house via the outside wall.

The Cat5E which runs down to the patch panel and Gigabit switch under the
stairs needs moving, and that goes under the floor to the centre of the
house.

There is an awkward tight spot under the floor at the top of the stairs
which makes it very fiddly to run cables from upstairs to under the stairs.

So I would rather re-use the current cable than run a new one.

Cheers



Dave R



--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

David wrote:

The Cat5E which runs down to the patch panel and Gigabit switch under the
stairs needs moving

That's ok then, I just wondered if it was an xDSL line, you thought that
junction box would be suitable, when it would scream "DIY bodge" to any
future BT engineer.

On 19/06/2019 18:02, David wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 13:31:10 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

David wrote:

I'm planning to move the main router across the room

By altering the phone line wiring, or the ethernet wiring?

The Internet connection doesn't use a phone line.




I have VM cable so the cable needs moving but it is already clipped to the
skirting and just needs unclipping part way and coiling.

The phone line will need similar treatment.

Both come from the front of the house via the outside wall.

The Cat5E which runs down to the patch panel and Gigabit switch under the
stairs needs moving, and that goes under the floor to the centre of the
house.

There is an awkward tight spot under the floor at the top of the stairs
which makes it very fiddly to run cables from upstairs to under the stairs.

So I would rather re-use the current cable than run a new one.

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it


Cheers



Dave R





--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on
Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?
If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

Remember, Virgin do offer speeds well in excess of 100Mbps, depends what
the O/P pays for ...

On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:02, David wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 13:31:10 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

David wrote:

I'm planning to move the main router across the room

By altering the phone line wiring, or the ethernet wiring?

The Internet connection doesn't use a phone line.




I have VM cable so the cable needs moving but it is already clipped to
the
skirting and just needs unclipping part way and coiling.

The phone line will need similar treatment.

Both come from the front of the house via the outside wall.

The Cat5E which runs down to the patch panel and Gigabit switch under the
stairs needs moving, and that goes under the floor to the centre of the
house.

There is an awkward tight spot under the floor at the top of the stairs
which makes it very fiddly to run cables from upstairs to under the
stairs.

So I would rather re-use the current cable than run a new one.

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

Not if he has 350Mbps virgin cable.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 17:54:39 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

On 19/06/2019 13:18, David wrote:
I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

Yup, they work and are fine at 1 Gbps - I had to use a few here and
there when altering my structured wiring system.

Me too. It wasn't so much alterations as a change of plan. Was originally
going to have a wiring closet in one of the smaller bedrooms, but then
decided to dedicate a large bedroom as an office for both of us. Some of
my previously laid cables were about a metre too short...



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

I dare say others will also have fast wifi even if you don't.

On 19/06/2019 18:53, Andy Burns wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on
Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?
If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

Remember, Virgin do offer speeds well in excess of 100Mbps, depends what
the O/P pays for ...



The wifi may be connected to other things like NAS boxes too.
Maybe TNPs linux boxes can only manage 100Mbs so he doesn't know?

On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.

On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.


To me you appear to be saying:
"I have three 5GHz access points and only 1Gb/s Ethernet"
the first is a measurement of radio frequency and the second is one of
throughput.


--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On 19/06/2019 21:21, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 17:54:39 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

On 19/06/2019 13:18, David wrote:
I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

Yup, they work and are fine at 1 Gbps - I had to use a few here and
there when altering my structured wiring system.

Me too. It wasn't so much alterations as a change of plan. Was originally
going to have a wiring closet in one of the smaller bedrooms, but then
decided to dedicate a large bedroom as an office for both of us. Some of
my previously laid cables were about a metre too short...

I found I had problems where I had pre-cut cables and made up looms -
then found there was an obstruction under a floor to detour around.




--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 19/06/2019 23:36, Graham. wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.


To me you appear to be saying:
"I have three 5GHz access points and only 1Gb/s Ethernet"
the first is a measurement of radio frequency and the second is one of
throughput.

I did wonder that... Although the latest 802.11ac does in theory go up
to more than Gbps speeds when using multiple antenna, MIMO, and beam
forming.



--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

I've only been able to approach the speeds my wifi is allegedly capable
of when I am close enough to use an ethernet cable anyway...


--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

On 19/06/2019 23:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 19/06/2019 23:36, Graham. wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi
if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.


To me you appear to be saying:
"I have three 5GHz access points and only 1Gb/s Ethernet"
the first is a measurement of radio frequency and the second is one of
throughput.

I did wonder that... Although the latest 802.11ac does in theory go up
to more than Gbps speeds when using multiple antenna, MIMO, and beam
forming.


I would be happy with a reliable 6 meter range at more than 5Mbps






--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On 19/06/2019 23:36, Graham. wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.


To me you appear to be saying:
"I have three 5GHz access points and only 1Gb/s Ethernet"
the first is a measurement of radio frequency and the second is one of
throughput.



You need the 5g access points to get 1200 Mbs.
you can't on 2.4G.

On 19/06/2019 23:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 19/06/2019 23:36, Graham. wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi
if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.


To me you appear to be saying:
"I have three 5GHz access points and only 1Gb/s Ethernet"
the first is a measurement of radio frequency and the second is one of
throughput.

I did wonder that... Although the latest 802.11ac does in theory go up
to more than Gbps speeds when using multiple antenna, MIMO, and beam
forming.




You don't need MIMO or beam forming to get 1200Mbs. You do need channel
width that isn't there on 2.4G WiFi.

Beam forming can increase the range though.
It also helps if you have lots of access points and clients in a small area.

On 20/06/2019 07:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/06/2019 23:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 19/06/2019 23:36, Graham. wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit
swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi
if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing
the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.


To me you appear to be saying:
"I have three 5GHz access points and only 1Gb/s Ethernet"
the first is a measurement of radio frequency and the second is one of
throughput.

I did wonder that... Although the latest 802.11ac does in theory go up
to more than Gbps speeds when using multiple antenna, MIMO, and beam
forming.


I would be happy with a reliable 6 meter range at more than 5Mbps



Currently 866.7 Mbs and I am effectively in the garden (conservatory) so
double walls and a fridge between me and the access point about 5m away.

On 20/06/2019 08:44, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 23:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 19/06/2019 23:36, Graham. wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:28, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:21, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/06/2019 18:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hangf on

Is this just the connection between the router and a gigabit
swiotch?

If its only carrying internet/wifi it only need be 100Mbps.

So no need to connect all the pairs or be prissy about it

My wifi runs at 600+ megabits a second so 100 megabit ethernet is a
bottleneck.

Yes it can be. Although even 100M Ethernet can be faster than wi-fi
if a
number of devices are talking to each other as they are not sharing
the
bandwidth. Each 100M data stream having its own separate bandwidth, as
long as multiple devices are not all trying to talk to the same one.

SteveW

Yes, but I have three 5Gig access points.

Only gig ethernet so that is a potential bottleneck here.


To me you appear to be saying:
"I have three 5GHz access points and only 1Gb/s Ethernet"
the first is a measurement of radio frequency and the second is one of
throughput.

I did wonder that... Although the latest 802.11ac does in theory go up
to more than Gbps speeds when using multiple antenna, MIMO, and beam
forming.




You don't need MIMO or beam forming to get 1200Mbs. You do need channel
width that isn't there on 2.4G WiFi.

Beam forming can increase the range though.
It also helps if you have lots of access points and clients in a small
area.

Yup, the mimo and beam forming get round the typical limitation of
previous wifi setups where the peak data rate was in effect shared
between all users. Now you can have multiple users each getting a high
data rate, even in cases where the total overall throughput exceeds the
single channel peak.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 12:18:48 +0000, David wrote:

I'm planning to move the main router across the room to a new location.

The obvious options are a patch cable round the skirting board from the
current wall socket or extending the Cat5E wiring under the floor and
moving the socket.

Any obvious "gotchas" in using a punch down coupler such as
https://www.amazon.co.uk/rhinocables...hdown-Coupler-
Ethernet/dp/B01N37M4KE/?

Looks pretty straight forward.

I surprised myself by discovering that when I originally installed the
Cat5e I left enough spare cable to allow me to move the socket across the
room without having to join it.

Memo to self - always leave some spare cable!

Cheers


Dave R

--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus