On 1/24/18 1:05 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote:
> I haven't seen any pictures during this thread of the transceivers we used
> with the 10MB yellow hose - heavy gauge metal boxes about 3" * 4" * 1" with N
> connectors. I remember piling up the 3 ft diameter loops of yellow coax in
> the m
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk
wrote:
>
> I haven't seen any pictures during this thread of the transceivers we used
> with the 10MB yellow hose - heavy gauge metal boxes about 3" * 4" * 1" with N
> connectors.
I have a 3COM 3C100 transceiver that must have come along
> On Jan 24, 2018, at 4:05 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 2018-Jan-23, at 12:27 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>> The Ethernet spec says that the cable OD is in the range .365 to .415 inch,
>> which is 9.27 to 10.54 mm. The nominal OD of RG-8/U is .405 inches, or
>> 10.28 m
On 2018-Jan-23, at 12:27 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> The Ethernet spec says that the cable OD is in the range .365 to .415 inch,
> which is 9.27 to 10.54 mm. The nominal OD of RG-8/U is .405 inches, or 10.28
> mm, which is within spec for Ethernet cable.
>
> One place where the two cabl
And if anyone has any of the early TCL transceivers, check the tantalums
on the power supply input. I've had many failures of them.
On 1/24/18 10:38 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
>
>
> On 1/24/18 10:23 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
>> I think that would make the transceivers slightly more
On 1/24/18 10:23 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> I think that would make the transceivers slightly more usable.
It makes them a LOT more usable :-)
On 01/24/2018 10:52 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
More pics of the 3mbit transceiver, cable and pics of a 10mbit TCL
transceiver (the original 10mbit one) are up now
Thank you for the pictures.
I really like the idea of the BNC modification. I think that would make
the transceivers slightl
More pics of the 3mbit transceiver, cable and pics of a 10mbit TCL transceiver
(the original 10mbit one)
are up now
On 1/23/18 8:10 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
> there are pictures of the transceiver w/o the vampire tap on bitsavers
> under http://bitsavers.org/pdf/xerox/ethernet_3mb/
> From: Chuck Guzis
> On 01/23/2018 04:04 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
>> they mention they used CATV technology (where the vampire taps come
>> from)
> Wasn't that ChaosNet?
The CHAOS net (capitalization varied, but original docs usually use two words)
hardware did use th
On 01/23/2018 04:04 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
> There is a clue in the PARC Ethernet Blue and White about this where
> they mention they used CATV technology (where the vampire taps come
> from ) but they don't actually say there that they used 75 Ohm cable,
> terminated at both ends.
Wasn'
On 1/23/18 4:04 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
> He's holding up the wrong stuff if it's RG-8
>
> Experimental Ethernet is 75 ohms.
>
I just went out to storage and got the run of cable that was used with a Dorado.
I'll take some pics of it later.
It is orange, looks like RG-6, is Malco 9827
On 1/23/18 12:27 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>> The stuff with better shield, marking bands, etc is 10 Mb; it's about 1.05cm
>> in diagmeter. The black stuff (the stuff Dave is holding in the video) is
>> 3Mb;
>> the piece I have is .95 cm.
>
> The Ethernet spec says that the cable OD
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
> Vampire taps. Now there's a blast from the past. Somewhere around here
> I still have my toolbag which still has my tap drill for installing those
> taps.
I also have a tap drill somewhere, but it was a rescue from a
clean-o
It was very low quality
> RG8.
>
> bill
> KB3YV
>
>
> From: cctalk on behalf of Pete Lancashire
> via cctalk
> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 3:51 PM
> To: Noel Chiappa; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> Subject: Re:
sy even at HF frequencies. It was very low quality
RG8.
bill
KB3YV
From: cctalk on behalf of Pete Lancashire via
cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 3:51 PM
To: Noel Chiappa; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Ethernet cable
Nice story.
On 01/23/2018 01:51 PM, Pete Lancashire via cctalk wrote:
Today one would never get away with such
I don't know. I've had to mine out quite a bit of old cable that was
abandoned in place to make room for new installations. Frequently the
building owners were more than happ
A side story. I was the only 'customer' of a long run of that yellow cable,
when we moved the 260 + 3/50's to a different location, I asked
if they were going to reuse the cable. "Nope, cost to much to get it out of
the roof trusses." I forget but it was a LONG run. Tektronix
back in those days was
On 01/23/2018 01:39 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
As can be seen in the photos, the 3Mb stuff (at least, the stuff we used)
was also solid. The diameter of the center was a little smaller on the
3Mb than on the 10Mb; .16mm versus .23mm; not sure if that was just
happenstance, or what.
Th
> From: Paul Koning
> The nominal OD of RG-8/U is .. within spec for Ethernet cable.
Oh, OK. I was just used to the 10Mb cable we used being slightly larger than
the 3Mb cable we used.
> Also, Ethernet requires a solid inner conductor (for the tap) while
> RG-8/U may come strande
> On Jan 23, 2018, at 3:19 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> From: Grant Taylor
>
>> I can fairly clearly see the RG-8/U on the side of the cable that David
>> is holding ... Sure, there was probably a better alternative that came
>> along after, with better shielding and marking band
> From: Grant Taylor
> I can fairly clearly see the RG-8/U on the side of the cable that David
> is holding ... Sure, there was probably a better alternative that came
> along after, with better shielding and marking bands.
You keep mixing up the 3 Mbit and 10 Mbit. _They were no
z_uQjFELOrnXk8x8KjKVM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-i_j_5u7YAhVD34MKHeSQC-wQ6AEIWzAG>
has to say about it. Google has it available for reading.
bill
From: cctalk on behalf of Grant Taylor via
cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 2:13 PM
To: ccta
On 01/23/2018 12:07 PM, Marc Verdiell via cctalk wrote:
Have you seen this part of the video where David Boggs (designer of the
first 3 Mb Ethernet card for the Alto), and Ron Crane (designer of the
10 Mb Ethernet) are doing a show and tell in their own words? You get
to see the clamps, the dri
k8x8KjKVM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-i_j_5u7YAhVD34MKHeSQC-wQ6AEIWzAG>
has to say about it. Google has it available for reading.
bill
From: cctalk on behalf of Grant Taylor via
cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 2:13 PM
To: cctalk@classiccmp.or
On 01/23/2018 12:09 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
"Transceivers should be installed only at precise 2.5-metre
intervals. This distance was chosen to not correspond to the wavelength
of the signal; this ensures that the reflections from multiple taps are
not in phase. These suitable poin
: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Ethernet cable (Was: Sun3 valuations?)
On 23/01/2018 16:48, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> On 01/23/2018 09:10 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>> If you didn't locate the transceivers on those black marks you would
>> have had t
> On Jan 23, 2018, at 11:10 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> If you didn't locate the transceivers on those black marks you would
> have had terrible performance as that affects collisions. Timing (among
> other things like grounding) was very important with that version of
> etherne
: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Ethernet cable (Was: Sun3 valuations?)
there are pictures of the transceiver w/o the vampire tap on bitsavers under
http://bitsavers.org/pdf/xerox/ethernet_3mb/
On 1/23/18 7:51 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
> > From: Grant Taylor
>
> > A
On 23/01/2018 16:48, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
On 01/23/2018 09:10 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
If you didn't locate the transceivers on those black marks you would
have had terrible performance as that affects collisions. Timing
(among other things like grounding) was very impor
On 01/23/2018 09:10 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
If you didn't locate the transceivers on those black marks you would
have had terrible performance as that affects collisions. Timing (among
other things like grounding) was very important with that version of
ethernet hardware.
It's
ctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Ethernet cable (Was: Sun3 valuations?)
there are pictures of the transceiver w/o the vampire tap on bitsavers
under http://bitsavers.org/pdf/xerox/ethernet_3mb/
On 1/23/18 7:51 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
> > From: Grant Taylor
>
> &
lf of Noel Chiappa via
cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 10:51 AM
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Ethernet cable (Was: Sun3 valuations?)
> From: Grant Taylor
> According to the following page, it was not RG-8 cable ... As such it
> was
there are pictures of the transceiver w/o the vampire tap on bitsavers
under http://bitsavers.org/pdf/xerox/ethernet_3mb/
On 1/23/18 7:51 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
> > From: Grant Taylor
>
> > According to the following page, it was not RG-8 cable ... As such it
> > was purpo
> From: Grant Taylor
> According to the following page, it was not RG-8 cable ... As such it
> was purpose built.
The 10MBit cable, yes; it was custom (you can see 'Ethernet' printed on the
chunk in the picture). (I'd forgotten about the black stripes! I'm not sure
we really bothered
34 matches
Mail list logo
