After having done some wiring and looking at other people's wiring. The cable is so cheap it's probably better to keep them all separate. Just because you can do a thing doesn't mean that's the way it should be done.
>From a troubleshooting point of view it's harder to track down. Ideally, you would also want to use different coloured cable for data and voice just to easier distinguish. Or label everything properly! A home network is more forgiving as you are most likely the master of your domain and would have a clearer understanding as to what you have done. In a business setting, you want to be more careful and make sure everything works. I would also recommend Cat5e, I think it is better for GigE. If there is any possibility that you might upgrade your network to use GigE then go with the better cabling. Anyhow, good luck! P.S. Please don't send HTML email to any of the CLUG lists... it really is annoying. ________________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kin C Wong Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 9:21 AM To: CLUG General Subject: RE: [clug-talk] voice & data on cat5 Thanks guys for the input.� I agree there is hardly any cost in running voice and data on separate lines -- I just thought it would be neat to run both voice and data on the same cat5 line.� Theoretically, you could run to data lines on one cat5 or one data and two voice, but unsure of the performance. I think I will go with tried and true and run two lines to be on the safe side.� But I am going to experiment with a couple of points in the office where the voice and data are going to be on the same line. Jarrod /� Cameron, I will let you know how it works at home in the next project as I am going to try to run both on the same cat5.� I have already wired the house for telephone (old house, so retrofitted it before the days of home networks).� The network cables are just hanging around, but this is about to change and I am going to feed it through the walls and terminate it properly in bix blocks and use patch cables to the router, etc.� I will let you know how it works out. At 05:20 PM 6/9/2005 +0000, you wrote: I will have to agree with Jarrod's reasoning on this one.� But you do need to ask what you will be using these lines for? If this was a business situation or you were pumping lots of stuff down the pipe then I would run seperate lines.� Takes no extra time and costs nothing extra to run two lines instead of one.� If it was for home use or low data throughout I can't see any problems with it. If you have the time and resources, do a small test run with both scenarios and see what your line testing brings up (i.e. dropped packets, etc.).� Try it at different data loads and different times of day, etc and if all goes well, then you have your answer.� One thing you could look at is some sort of data shaping.� Basically allocating certain types of traffic certain levels of service and bandwiodth to take up. Packeteer is probably one of the best known "appliance packet shapers" out there and there equipment is pretty cool.� I have some information on them from my days of working with it.� But I am sure there are some FLOSS projects out there that will do the same thing. I would be interested to hear what you discover and finally decide on. Cameron > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Jarrod Major > Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 10:32 PM > To: 'CLUG General' > Subject: RE: [clug-talk] voice & data on cat5 > > > A Pro would be that your regular 100BaseT Ethernet users two pairs out of > the four so theoretically you could use the extra two pair to do > voice. I'm > not sure if telephone cabling and Ethernet cabling would suffer from being > run in the same housing. Anyone with network cabling want to comment on > this? > > I know that for my DSL at home, rather than use filters, I have one line > from the demarc that has the off pair of wires being used for the DSL from > the POTS splitter. The other pair has plain old telephone on it > and as such > it doesn't appear to have any degradation from proximity. > > _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying Regards, Kin C Wong VP Technology PDK Control Consulting International Ltd P.O. Box 22310 Bankers Hall Calgary, Alberta, Canada�� T2P 4J1 phone: 403-571-0999 fax: 403-571-0991 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: www.csa-pdk.com _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
