On Du, 05 feb 12, 18:30:42, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Not all do. Some do. And the reason is that I'm a stickler for
technical correctness, I guess, and I don't like seeing misinformation
spread across the web. Yes, I'm a one man internet correctness police
force. I stay really busy. ;)
You
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:30:42 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
(...)
Still friends?
But of course :-)
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:50:48 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 2/4/2012 10:03 AM, Camaleón wrote:
(...)
You never know what kind of company is going to be installed next to
your garden, right? So one day you open the door and find a power plant
is your brand-new neighbor. At the time you (or a
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
You have a fundamental misunderstanding induced EMI/RFI. The source of
the interference must be relatively close, physically, to the cable, in
order for the cable to pick up sufficient noise to interfere with
signals. A power plant, or even a Tesla coil, in the building
Miles Fidelman writes:
Induced currents in poorly wired power-line grounding probably effect
you more if you're using shielded cable connected to that same
grounding.
You should not ground the shield at both ends.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
- Original Message -
From: Camaleón
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: 2/5/2012 11:04:50 AM
Subject: Re: My network speed is only 10MB
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:50:48 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 2/4/2012 10:03 AM, Camaleón wrote:
(...)
You never know what kind
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 08:44:32 -0800, owens wrote:
(...)
Are we in an apples and oranges debate here? Camaleon continues to
refer to FTTH for her examples which by nature are controlled by the
PTTs or Telecommunications providers, while Stan and others use
intra-data center and intra-LAN
On 2/4/2012 12:25 PM, Camaleón wrote:
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:36:04 -0600, John Hasler wrote:
Stan Hoeppner writes:
In the US, in the case of environments such as manufacturing floors etc
with horrific EMI levels, fiber is used instead of UTP CAT5/6. With EFI
levels that high, even STP won't
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:39:39 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 2/4/2012 12:25 PM, Camaleón wrote:
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:36:04 -0600, John Hasler wrote:
Stan Hoeppner writes:
In the US, in the case of environments such as manufacturing floors
etc with horrific EMI levels, fiber is used
On 2/4/2012 7:22 PM, John Hasler wrote:
Camaleón wrote:
Fiber is another different thing. We do also have it installed since the
last summer (4 FTTH lines, a 16-fibers cable) but working with the fiber
can be only done by certified installers and the required tools are very
expensive, not
Stan writes:
True, single mode vs multi mode. But you still need
qualified/experienced installers with the proper tools to do the
terminations.
As far as I know most use cables cut to length and terminated at the
factory for in-building runs (though it is certainly possible to do it
in the
On 2/5/2012 7:34 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
You have a fundamental misunderstanding induced EMI/RFI. The source of
the interference must be relatively close, physically, to the cable, in
order for the cable to pick up sufficient noise to interfere with
signals. A power
On 2/5/2012 2:33 PM, Camaleón wrote:
It's okay, Stan. I don't know why most of the replies in this list end
this way with you.
Not all do. Some do. And the reason is that I'm a stickler for
technical correctness, I guess, and I don't like seeing misinformation
spread across the web. Yes,
On 2/2/2012 8:11 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:43:39 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Nobody uses shielded twisted pair cabling these days, not for quite some
time. There is almost zero benefit. And if not installed (grounded)
correctly the performance can be horrible, and/or links
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:40:41 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 2/2/2012 8:11 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:43:39 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Nobody uses shielded twisted pair cabling these days, not for quite
some time. There is almost zero benefit. And if not installed
On 2/4/2012 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote:
No, I can't see why is not that popular within the US, there are many
advantadges for having shielded cables because external interferences -
that are not always under your control- still apply (e.g., wireless
connections, proximity to high power lines
Stan Hoeppner writes:
In the US, in the case of environments such as manufacturing floors
etc with horrific EMI levels, fiber is used instead of UTP CAT5/6.
With EFI levels that high, even STP won't save you.
STP can make things worse as almost nobody knows how to terminate
shields in such a
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:36:04 -0600, John Hasler wrote:
Stan Hoeppner writes:
In the US, in the case of environments such as manufacturing floors etc
with horrific EMI levels, fiber is used instead of UTP CAT5/6. With EFI
levels that high, even STP won't save you.
STP can make things worse
On 2/4/2012 10:03 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 08:47:16 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 2/4/2012 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote:
No, I can't see why is not that popular within the US, there are many
advantadges for having shielded cables because external interferences -
that are not
Camaleón wrote:
Fiber is another different thing. We do also have it installed since the
last summer (4 FTTH lines, a 16-fibers cable) but working with the fiber
can be only done by certified installers and the required tools are very
expensive, not every company can afford that.
The
[No Subject]
Hide Details
FROM:
* D.G. Gómez
TO:
* debian-user@lists.debian.org
Message flagged
Sunday, 5 February 2012 10:28 AM
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:36:04 -0600, John Hasler wrote:
Stan Hoeppner writes:
In the US, in the case of environments such as manufacturing
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:43:39 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 2/1/2012 9:52 AM, Camaleón wrote:
One of our company networks was installed from scratch on later 2005
and I made it Gigabit (STP Cat.6) but should I have now to do it again
I would consider in adding 10 Gigabit capabilities, at
On 1/31/2012 11:04 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:18:44 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
http://www.netgear.com/business/products/switches/fully-managed-switches/switch-modules/AX744.aspx
Oh, I see...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Gigabit_Ethernet#10GBASE-CX4
Never heard about
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:48:23 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 1/31/2012 11:04 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:18:44 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
http://www.netgear.com/business/products/switches/fully-managed-switches/switch-modules/AX744.aspx
Oh, I see...
On 2/1/2012 9:52 AM, Camaleón wrote:
One of our company networks was installed from scratch on later 2005 and
I made it Gigabit (STP Cat.6) but should I have now to do it again I
would consider in adding 10 Gigabit capabilities, at least for the
cabling (devices are still overpriced): it
On 1/30/2012 10:15 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2012 15:38:45 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 1/22/2012 11:45 AM, hvw59601 wrote:
So I check NewEgg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122392 10Gb/s:
Check that price! $279.99 Holy Cow! And that's the cheapest
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:18:44 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 1/30/2012 10:15 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2012 15:38:45 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 1/22/2012 11:45 AM, hvw59601 wrote:
So I check NewEgg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122392
10Gb/s:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2012 15:38:45 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 1/22/2012 11:45 AM, hvw59601 wrote:
So I check NewEgg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122392 10Gb/s:
Check that price! $279.99 Holy Cow! And that's the cheapest one!
You're either a moron or a
On Sun, 22 Jan 2012 23:14:15 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Ethernet at 100 Mb/s = 12.5 MB/s
File copy at 10 MB/s = 80 Mb/s
Ethernet at 1000 Mb/s = 125 MB/s
File copy at 117 MB/s = 936 Mb/s
Thanks Stan, for all your explains.
--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
T o n g wrote:
Hi,
I just tested my network speed. It is only 10MB. But I think it can do
better. So,
- How can tell if my network cards can do better than 10MB?
- What's the most probable reason for the slow network speed? I.e., which
is a good order that I check for the problem?
Very
hvw59601 wrote:
Very interesting. So I measured... 11MB/s. Ethtool says card
(onboard) can do 100Mb/s. So quite good.
I think: get a faster card and put that in... :-)
So I check NewEgg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122392
10Gb/s:
Check that price!
On 1/22/2012 11:45 AM, hvw59601 wrote:
So I check NewEgg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122392
10Gb/s:
Check that price! $279.99 Holy Cow! And that's the cheapest one!
You're either a moron or a troll. Which is it?
--
Stan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 1/22/2012 9:09 PM, T o n g wrote:
Thanks again for everyone's follow up. Interesting discussion.
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 22:09:13 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote:
9.9MB/s (megabyte/sec.) is roughly 80mb/s (megabit/sec) - fairly
reasonable for a 100baseT network card
Oh, now I recall why I
T o n g wrote:
I just tested my network speed. It is only 10MB. But I think it can do
better. So,
- How can tell if my network cards can do better than 10MB?
- What's the most probable reason for the slow network speed? I.e., which
is a good order that I check for the problem?
Start
do anything good here.
hope others would add more to it.
Syed Hasan Atizaz
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:42 PM, T o n g mlist4sunt...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
I just tested my network speed. It is only 10MB. But I think it can do
better. So,
- How can tell if my network cards can do better than
T o n g wrote:
Hi,
I just tested my network speed. It is only 10MB. But I think it can do
better. So,
snip
How did you test it?
Hugo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive
Hello,
T o n g a écrit :
I just tested my network speed. It is only 10MB.
10 MB is not a speed. It is a quantity, a volume of data. Also, B is
ambiguous : is it bit or byte ? A speed would be expressed in bit/s or
byte/s.
- How can tell if my network cards can do better than 10MB?
Using
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 23:49:15 +0500, Syed Hasan Atizaz wrote:
well 10MB is quite good, things that could affect your network speed
could be firewall, iptables, router itself plus the cables, i mean no
matter if you have cat 6 connected at one end and . . .
Thanks for everybody's replies,
On 1/21/2012 12:42 PM, T o n g wrote:
I just tested my network speed. It is only 10MB. But I think it can do
better. So,
How did you test, with what software? Also:
MB = MegaBytes
mb = megabits
Assuming you mean 10MB/s then you probably have a 100FDX ethernet NIC,
switch, or both.
- How
T o n g wrote:
FYI, this is how I tested,
Measuring Network Speeds with Netcat and Dd
http://jbowes.wordpress.com/2010/10/13/measuring-network-speeds-with-
netcat-and-dd/
Here is my output:
512+0 records in
512+0 records out
536870912 bytes (537 MB) copied, 54.4971 s, 9.9 MB/s
On 1/21/2012 9:09 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
T o n g wrote:
FYI, this is how I tested,
Measuring Network Speeds with Netcat and Dd
http://jbowes.wordpress.com/2010/10/13/measuring-network-speeds-with-
netcat-and-dd/
Here is my output:
512+0 records in
512+0 records out
536870912
41 matches
Mail list logo
