When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
install the face plates for the network points.

A diagram of the network is here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Thanks

Edward

wrote in message 
news:01634860-e4c5-4b4d-bf9d-ccc6129d7c35@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
> install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
> the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
> there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
> who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
> install the face plates for the network points.
>
> A diagram of the network is here:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
> The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
> points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
> wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
> as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>
> Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
> Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
> installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
> unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>
> Thanks
>
> Edward

Are you using crossover patch cables ?

wrote
> When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
> install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
> the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
> there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
> who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
> install the face plates for the network points.
>
> A diagram of the network is here:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
> The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
> points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
> wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
> as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>
> Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
> Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
> installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
> unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>
> Thanks
>
> Edward

When you plugged the laptop into the router direct, did you use one of the 
patch leads or another cable?
Just a check to make sure you haven't got "cross-over" cable by mistake for 
the patch leads.

Phil

In article
,
    wrote:
> When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
> install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
> the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
> there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
> who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
> install the face plates for the network points.

> A diagram of the network is here:

> http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

> The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
> points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
> wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
> as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

> Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

> Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
> installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
> unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

Experienced engineer or not he's made a cock up?

Here's the correct wiring:-

http://www.jaysafe.co.uk/technical/rj45.asp   

Just a thought - have you got face plates either end with jumpers to the
router?

-- 
*Great groups from little icons grow *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
  wrote:
>When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
>install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
>the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
>there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
>who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
>install the face plates for the network points.
>
>A diagram of the network is here:
>
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
>The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
>points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
>wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
>as I say, he's an experienced engineer.

Get him back in...

(But by posting here, I'm guessing that might not be an option!)

>Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
>the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
>plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
>Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
>installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
>unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.

As others have said it might be that you're used cross-over cables,
however every router I've seen recently has auto cross-over ports now,
so it's unlikely that would cause a problem.

There are 2 "standards" for wiring cat-5 cable though - maybe he's using
one and your patch leads use the other?

Gordon

wrote in message 
news:01634860-e4c5-4b4d-bf9d-ccc6129d7c35@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
> install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
> the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
> there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
> who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
> install the face plates for the network points.
>
> A diagram of the network is here:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
> The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
> points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
> wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
> as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>
> Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
> Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
> installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
> unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>
> Thanks
>
> Edward


In addition to what the others have said ( incorrect patch cables ); can you 
unscrew the face-plates, and either take a picture or describe what wires 
have been punched down into which terminals?

I'd expect it to be:

1 Orange / White
2 Solid Orange
3 Green / White
4 Solid Blue
5 Blue / White
6 Solid Green
7 Brown / White
8 Solid Brown

( The Orange twisted pair may be swapped withthe Green twisted pair on some 
installations, that's OK )

What's important it the twisted pairs.
One pair ( usually orange ) is used for pins 1+2.
Another pair ( usually green ) is used for pins 3+6.
This is critical.
The blue pair and brown pair are only used on gigabit and / or PoE systems, 
but these are becoming commonplace, and should be wired up correctly too.

A common wiring error is to use one pair for 1+2,
another for 3+4, another for 5+6, another for 7+8.
This will not work properly.

It is essential that one twisted pair is used for 3+6, as described above.

-- 
Ron

">
> There are 2 "standards" for wiring cat-5 cable though - maybe he's using
> one and your patch leads use the other?
>

That doesn't matter.
So long as the wiring within a cable is the same at either end, then you can 
mix A and B patch leads and fixed wiring.
A patch-lead or fixed wiring terminated using A at one end and B at the 
other will be a crossover cable.

The only diff is that the TX will be carried on the orange pair over one 
section, and the green pair over the next.
And the RX will be carried over the green pair on one section, and the 
orange pair over the next.

The electrons are colour-blind.

So long as 1+2 are a twisted pair, and 3+6 are a twised pair, the actual 
colours used are irrelevant.

-- 
Ron

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:

> Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.

It would be interesting to know the make and model of the router. Others
have suggested this might be due to the use of a crossover lead but most
recent models should automatically compensate for transposed Tx and Rx
lines. If this is the case then it wouldn't matter of one lead was a
crossover anyway.

When you connect over the LAN there's 2 fly leads involved, one from the
laptop to the individual faceplate and and another from the 4 gang
faceplate to the router. Have you tested each lead individually, i.e. 
connect the laptop directly to the router with each one in turn.

-- 
Mike Clarke

On Sep 17, 5:28 pm, Mike Clarke  wrote:
> teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> > the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> > plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
> It would be interesting to know the make and model of the router. Others
> have suggested this might be due to the use of a crossover lead but most
> recent models should automatically compensate for transposed Tx and Rx
> lines. If this is the case then it wouldn't matter of one lead was a
> crossover anyway.
>
> When you connect over the LAN there's 2 fly leads involved, one from the
> laptop to the individual faceplate and and another from the 4 gang
> faceplate to the router. Have you tested each lead individually, i.e.
> connect the laptop directly to the router with each one in turn.

Thanks for all your thoughts.  Replies below:

Yes, I've tested each lead individually.  Well, I've swapped them
around and they all allow the laptop to connect directly to the
router.  I don't know if they're crossover patch cables or not - one
says "CAT 5 PATCH CABLE UTP", the other says, amongst other things,
"VERIFIED TIA/EIA 568A CAT 5 PATCH"

The router is a Netgear ADSL Firewall Router DG834.  DCHP is on,
natch.

A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/

The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are

Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White

The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.

Thanks

Edward

>A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is here:
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/
>
>The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are
>
>Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
>Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White
>
>The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.

Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
You need to look at the labeling under the wires.

Pin 1 is green/white.
Pin 2 is orange.

That's all wrong.
The pairs are all messed up.

You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as everyone 
has indicated.   Use the colour codes I listed.

Check both ends.

-- 
Ron

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:27:59 -0700 (PDT), teddysnips@hotmail.com
wrote:

>When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
>install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
>the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
>there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
>who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
>install the face plates for the network points.
>
>A diagram of the network is here:
>
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
>The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
>points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
>wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
>as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>
>Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
>the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
>plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
>Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
>installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
>unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>
If the laptop works plugged directly into any of the router ports I'd
get the wiring and socket outlets checked again.  You can make a cheap
test kit by cutting a patch cable in two and shorting out each twisted
pair. Plug it in and stick the other half in the appropriate socket
and use a continuity tester on each twisted pair on that cable. Either
you have faulty wiring connections or the sockets are duff. That does
happen. I have two needing replacement ATM because the RJ45 plug
waggles about in them.

"Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS> wrote in message 
news:48d13d50$0$510$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk...
> >A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is here:
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/
>>
>>The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are
>>
>>Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
>>Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White
>>
>>The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.
>
> Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
> You need to look at the labeling under the wires.
>
> Pin 1 is green/white.
> Pin 2 is orange.
>
> That's all wrong.
> The pairs are all messed up.
>
> You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as everyone 
> has indicated.   Use the colour codes I listed.
>
> Check both ends.
>
> -- 
> Ron
>
>


To be more specific, it looks like the Orange/white and Green/white are 
swapped.

Again, check all outlets, both ends.

-- 
Ron

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:29:27 +0100, Alang 
wrote:

>On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:27:59 -0700 (PDT), teddysnips@hotmail.com
>wrote:
>
>>When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
>>install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
>>the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
>>there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
>>who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
>>install the face plates for the network points.
>>
>>A diagram of the network is here:
>>
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>>
>>The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
>>points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
>>wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
>>as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>>
>>Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
>>the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
>>plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>>
>>Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
>>installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
>>unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>>
>If the laptop works plugged directly into any of the router ports I'd
>get the wiring and socket outlets checked again.  You can make a cheap
>test kit by cutting a patch cable in two and shorting out each twisted
>pair. Plug it in and stick the other half in the appropriate socket
>and use a continuity tester on each twisted pair on that cable. Either
>you have faulty wiring connections or the sockets are duff. That does
>happen. I have two needing replacement ATM because the RJ45 plug
>waggles about in them.  

Can I ask something relevant to this ..Why is there a 4 way box
between the router and the faceplates .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/

 Could the length(s)  of Cat 5 cable not have been taken from the
router straight to each of the faceplates instaed of using the patch
cables . ?

On Sep 17, 6:58 pm, NOSPAM...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:29:27 퍝, Alang 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:27:59 -0700 (PDT), teddysn...@hotmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> >>When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
> >>install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
> >>the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
> >>there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
> >>who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
> >>install the face plates for the network points.
>
> >>A diagram of the network is here:
>
> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
> >>The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
> >>points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
> >>wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and> >>as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>
> >>Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> >>the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> >>plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
> >>Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
> >>installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
> >>unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>
> >If the laptop works plugged directly into any of the router ports I'd
> >get the wiring and socket outlets checked again.  You can make a cheap
> >test kit by cutting a patch cable in two and shorting out each twisted
> >pair. Plug it in and stick the other half in the appropriate socket
> >and use a continuity tester on each twisted pair on that cable. Either
> >you have faulty wiring connections or the sockets are duff. That does
> >happen. I have two needing replacement ATM because the RJ45 plug
> >waggles about in them.  
>
> Can I ask something relevant to this ..Why is there a 4 way box
> between the router and the faceplates .http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
>  Could the length(s)  of Cat 5 cable not have been taken from the
> router straight to each of the faceplates instaed of using the patch
> cables . ?  

The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang.  The individual 1-
gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house.  The
way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.

Edward

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:

> The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang.  The individual 1-
> gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house.  The
> way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
> from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
> thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.

Could have been much simpler to simply run a single wire from the router
to a network switch which these days are cheap as chips for an 8 port.
Unless of course there was nowhere to plug a network switch in where you
have the connection box.

:¬)

-- 
http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk - Fitness+Gym Equipment.
http://www.bodysolid-gym-equipment.co.uk
http://www.trade-price-supplements.co.uk
http://www.water-rower.co.uk

On Sep 17, 6:31 pm, "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS>
wrote:
> "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS> wrote in message
>
> news:48d13d50$0$510$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>
>
>
>
>
> > >A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is here:
> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/
>
> >>The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are
>
> >>Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
> >>Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White
>
> >>The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.
>
> > Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
> > You need to look at the labeling under the wires.
>
> > Pin 1 is green/white.
> > Pin 2 is orange.
>
> > That's all wrong.
> > The pairs are all messed up.
>
> > You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as everyone
> > has indicated.   Use the colour codes I listed.
>
> > Check both ends.
>
> > --
> > Ron
>
> To be more specific, it looks like the Orange/white and Green/white are
> swapped.
>
> Again, check all outlets, both ends.

I have a problem with this problem, conceptually.

When I plug my laptop directly into the router, the patch cable
carries the signal directly along the cable according to how the patch
cable is wired.

However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?

See this diagram that will probably only confuse the issue

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2866137802/

Edward

On Sep 17, 7:28 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
<0845.86.86....@GymRatZ.Gym.Equipment> wrote:
> teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang.  The individual 1> > gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house.  The
> > way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
> > from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
> > thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.
>
> Could have been much simpler to simply run a single wire from the router
> to a network switch which these days are cheap as chips for an 8 port.
> Unless of course there was nowhere to plug a network switch in where you
> have the connection box.

Um, what's a network switch?

Edward

wrote in message 
news:026adbd5-db60-4a22-bbd0-4875fd97a16d@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...


> However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
> identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
> laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
> gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?

No it really does matter.
The signals are very small and they need protection from interference.
Its done by twisting the two wires carrying the signal together.
If you use one wire from one twisted pair and another from a different pair 
for a signal there is a lot of interference and it doesn't work
This is what appears to have been done here.

2 should be orange and 1 should be orange and white as indicated by the 
colours on the socket.

In fact the brown + brown and white appears to be the only correctly wired 
pair.

The tester will still show it as correct BTW as it doesn't actually check 
the pairs are pairs.

teddysnips@hotmail.com coughed up some electrons that declared:

> On Sep 17, 7:28 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
> <0845.86.86....@GymRatZ.Gym.Equipment> wrote:
>> teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> > The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang.  The individual 1-
>> > gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house.  The
>> > way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
>> > from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
>> > thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.
>>
>> Could have been much simpler to simply run a single wire from the router
>> to a network switch which these days are cheap as chips for an 8 port.
>> Unless of course there was nowhere to plug a network switch in where you
>> have the connection box.
> 
> Um, what's a network switch?
> 
> Edward

It's effectively a router without the routing part.

Which sounds assanine, until you get some base definitions:

hub - boost/cleanup of electrical layer signal, does not understand any
protocol - no one really uses these anymore

router - is an IP endpoint for more than one network (ie it has 2 or more IP
addresses of its own). It can "route" or transfer packets between networks
using a rules table (aka "routing table") - the Internet is made of these.

switch - in between a hub and a router. Does no need an IP address (but may
have one so you can manage it). If part of a network, knows or learns how
to get different devices to talk to each other. Is actually a router at the
ethernet frame layer (uses MAC addresses as base addresses, not IP
addresses). Some switches have ability to make intelligent decisions about
where to send packets (or not) by looking into the protocol and seeing if
it's something they've been programmed to understand (eg HTTP, which is
based off TCP which is based off IP which is based of many things, one of
which is ethernet).

Fancy switches, like the big expensive ones made by Extreme and Cisco blur
the distinction between router and switch and general implement
functionality from both camps.

The long and the short of it is:

you generally have to set up a router, and you have a router as your
incoming end of your broadband connection - there's one the other end, and
maybe lots more between that and the news server you just read this message
off.

you generally don't need to set up a switch for it to be useful, but you
might if you're being fancy.

you don't set up hubs as a rule, but they're crap because for every packet
you bang into one, it sends the same packet out all its ports. A switch
learns the correct port to use, so is more efficient.

That may or may not be as clear as mud (blame the pear cider I just had).

Cheers

Tim

wrote in message 
news:026adbd5-db60-4a22-bbd0-4875fd97a16d@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 17, 6:31 pm, "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS>
wrote:
> "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS> wrote in message
>
> news:48d13d50$0$510$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>
>
>
>
>
> > >A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is here:
> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/
>
> >>The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are
>
> >>Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
> >>Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White
>
> >>The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.
>
> > Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
> > You need to look at the labeling under the wires.
>
> > Pin 1 is green/white.
> > Pin 2 is orange.
>
> > That's all wrong.
> > The pairs are all messed up.
>
> > You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as 
> > everyone
> > has indicated. Use the colour codes I listed.
>
> > Check both ends.
>
> > --
> > Ron
>
> To be more specific, it looks like the Orange/white and Green/white are
> swapped.
>
> Again, check all outlets, both ends.

I have a problem with this problem, conceptually.

When I plug my laptop directly into the router, the patch cable
carries the signal directly along the cable according to how the patch
cable is wired.

However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?

--------------------------

NO.
You mis-understand a cruicial point.

The colours do not matter, ( the electrons are colour-blind) but the fact 
that the pairs are twisted do.
Pins 1+3 MUST be from one twisted pair ( usually orng / orng-wht, but could 
be any colour ).
Pins 3+6 MUST be from another twisted pair. ( usually grn / grn-wht, but 
again, could be any colour. )

This is absolutely crucial.

Also, the arangement of pins on the outlets varies from brand to brand.
So you also need to take care of that.
You need to read the pin numbers on the faceplates and punch the wires down 
using the colour-codes we have shown.

You just need to do what we say.
Make the wiring at BOTH ends compliant with the standard we have indicated.
Honestly.

I've installed these things more times than I can recount.

-- 
Ron

On Sep 17, 7:55 pm, "dennis@home" 
wrote:
>  wrote in message
>
> news:026adbd5-db60-4a22-bbd0-4875fd97a16d@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
> > identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
> > laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
> > gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?
>
> No it really does matter.
> The signals are very small and they need protection from interference.
> Its done by twisting the two wires carrying the signal together.
> If you use one wire from one twisted pair and another from a different pair
> for a signal there is a lot of interference and it doesn't work
> This is what appears to have been done here.
>
> 2 should be orange and 1 should be orange and white as indicated by the
> colours on the socket.
>
> In fact the brown  brown and white appears to be the only correctly wired
> pair.
>
> The tester will still show it as correct BTW as it doesn't actually check
> the pairs are pairs.

Awesome.  Just what I wanted to know!

Thanks

Edward

wrote in message 
news:5cfd3554-104f-4044-aa92-6aeaf6257612@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 17, 7:28 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
<0845.86.86....@GymRatZ.Gym.Equipment> wrote:
> teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang. The individual 1-
> > gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house. The
> > way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
> > from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
> > thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.
>
> Could have been much simpler to simply run a single wire from the router
> to a network switch which these days are cheap as chips for an 8 port.
> Unless of course there was nowhere to plug a network switch in where you
> have the connection box.

Um, what's a network switch?

Edward


------------

A switch is what's already inside your router.
A device to connect 4 network devices together ( 5 if you include the router 
itself. )

There's nothing wrong with your network layout: it's ideal.
You just need to sort out the botched wiring.

-- 
Ron

teddysnips@hotmail.com coughed up some electrons that declared:

> I have a problem with this problem, conceptually.
> 
> When I plug my laptop directly into the router, the patch cable
> carries the signal directly along the cable according to how the patch
> cable is wired.
> 
> However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
> identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
> laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
> gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?

You'd think so and you'd be right if it were DC signals involved.

However, you're shoving signals with componets in the 100's MHz or GHz range
down the wires. Each circuit path must be down a twisted pair for balance
and signal immunity, or you'll get complete rubbish out the end, to the
point where the equipment won't even give you a link-active light.

Which sounds like the problem you're describing.

You mate with the cheap more-or-less DC buzz-through tool (which is what
your description sounds like) proved the pin assignments are correct. Those
tools do not prove the cable is wired properly. Proper test kit costs
1000's and does time domain reflectrometry and/or other impressive sounding
tests to prove it's right.

As others have said, best get in and check the wire colours. Use a good
light - the brown and orange, and the blue and greens are had to tell apart
in poor light.

Cheers

Tim

On Sep 17, 7:57 pm, Tim S  wrote:
> teddysn...@hotmail.com coughed up some electrons that declared:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 17, 7:28 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
> > <0845.86.86....@GymRatZ.Gym.Equipment> wrote:
> >> teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> > The router is in one room, connected to the 4-gang.  The individual 1-
> >> > gangs are in various other rooms on various levels in the house.  The
> >> > way I look at it (as a layman in the network game) is that the wire
> >> > from the back of the router, via the patch cable, to the 4-gang and
> >> > thence to the 1-gang is just a big extension lead.
>
> >> Could have been much simpler to simply run a single wire from the router
> >> to a network switch which these days are cheap as chips for an 8 port.
> >> Unless of course there was nowhere to plug a network switch in where you
> >> have the connection box.
>
> > Um, what's a network switch?
>
> > Edward
>
> It's effectively a router without the routing part.
>
> Which sounds assanine, until you get some base definitions:
>
> hub - boost/cleanup of electrical layer signal, does not understand any
> protocol - no one really uses these anymore
>
> router - is an IP endpoint for more than one network (ie it has 2 or more IP
> addresses of its own). It can "route" or transfer packets between networks
> using a rules table (aka "routing table") - the Internet is made of these> switch - in between a hub and a router. Does no need an IP address (but may
> have one so you can manage it). If part of a network, knows or learns how
> to get different devices to talk to each other. Is actually a router at the
> ethernet frame layer (uses MAC addresses as base addresses, not IP
> addresses). Some switches have ability to make intelligent decisions about
> where to send packets (or not) by looking into the protocol and seeing if
> it's something they've been programmed to understand (eg HTTP, which is
> based off TCP which is based off IP which is based of many things, one of
> which is ethernet).
>
> Fancy switches, like the big expensive ones made by Extreme and Cisco blur
> the distinction between router and switch and general implement
> functionality from both camps.
>
> The long and the short of it is:
>
> you generally have to set up a router, and you have a router as your
> incoming end of your broadband connection - there's one the other end, and
> maybe lots more between that and the news server you just read this message
> off.
>
> you generally don't need to set up a switch for it to be useful, but you
> might if you're being fancy.
>
> you don't set up hubs as a rule, but they're crap because for every packet
> you bang into one, it sends the same packet out all its ports. A switch
> learns the correct port to use, so is more efficient.
>
> That may or may not be as clear as mud (blame the pear cider I just had).

Yo! Pear cider!  My man Kevin Minchew (well, he's his own man,
actually) brews totally awesome pear cider.  Single variety, total
headf*uck.

Anyway, thanks for the learned exegesis about switches, routers and
hubs.  I take the point that I've probably over-engineered the damn
thing, but I've bought the router now so I'm stuck with it.  But it
looks very much as if other equally clever bods up-thread have
identified the problem (incorrect wiring) so I'll let y'all know how
it goes.

Ain't Usenet wonderful!

Edward

Ron Lowe wrote:
>  wrote in message 
> news:026adbd5-db60-4a22-bbd0-4875fd97a16d@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 17, 6:31 pm, "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS>
> wrote:
>> "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS> wrote in message
>>
>> news:48d13d50$0$510$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > >A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is here:
>> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/
>>
>> >>The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are
>>
>> >>Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
>> >>Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White
>>
>> >>The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.
>>
>> > Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
>> > You need to look at the labeling under the wires.
>>
>> > Pin 1 is green/white.
>> > Pin 2 is orange.
>>
>> > That's all wrong.
>> > The pairs are all messed up.
>>
>> > You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as > 
>> everyone
>> > has indicated. Use the colour codes I listed.
>>
>> > Check both ends.
>>
>> > --
>> > Ron
>>
>> To be more specific, it looks like the Orange/white and Green/white are
>> swapped.
>>
>> Again, check all outlets, both ends.
> 
> I have a problem with this problem, conceptually.
> 
> When I plug my laptop directly into the router, the patch cable
> carries the signal directly along the cable according to how the patch
> cable is wired.
> 
> However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
> identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
> laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
> gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?
> 
> --------------------------
> 
> NO.
> You mis-understand a cruicial point.
> 
> The colours do not matter, ( the electrons are colour-blind) but the 
> fact that the pairs are twisted do.
> Pins 1+3 MUST be from one twisted pair ( usually orng / orng-wht, but 
> could be any colour ).
Completely WRONG

see here for a very good chart.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_5_cable

1 & 2 are a pair, 3 and 6 are a pair, 4 and 5 are a pair, and 7 ad 8 are 
a pair.

Generally it doesn't matter if the pairs are wire arsy versy..as long as 
the pairs are gong to the correct pins.

The most common faults I have found are badly terminated sockets..the 
IDC is a bugger to get right without a proper tool, and the next problem 
that has happened has been wrong grade of socket/plug. That simply 
doesn't make proper contact.


Ethernet normally uses 3 and 6, and 4 and 5. We used to use the other 
two pairs for telephony




> Pins 3+6 MUST be from another twisted pair. ( usually grn / grn-wht, but 
> again, could be any colour. )
> 
> This is absolutely crucial.
> 
> Also, the arangement of pins on the outlets varies from brand to brand.

Thats true. Whats inside may not actually be 12345678 in order.

> So you also need to take care of that.
> You need to read the pin numbers on the faceplates and punch the wires 
> down using the colour-codes we have shown.

NO, use the ones in the wiki article: they are correct. Either scheme 
works, as long as its the same both ends.

> 
> You just need to do what we say.

No, what the standrd is. You are talking bollox ;-)

> Make the wiring at BOTH ends compliant with the standard we have indicated.
> Honestly.
> 
> I've installed these things more times than I can recount.

Strange that you have managed to get it wrong every time, then.

>

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:

> Anyway, thanks for the learned exegesis about switches, routers and
> hubs.  I take the point that I've probably over-engineered the damn
> thing, but I've bought the router now so I'm stuck with it.  But it

No, what you have done it the right way to do it. Had you have taken the 
wires that connect to the individual sockets straight to the router then 
you would have needed to terminate each of them in RJ45 plugs. This is 
not only slow and tedious (much simpler and quicker buying ready made 
patch leads), but also requires that you take solid core cat5 into the 
plugs - which while it can be done is not ultra reliable and technically 
speaking requires a different type of plug.

For bigger posher installs, then you might use a patch panel in place of 
the 4 way, and a multiport switch in place of the router. That all works 
nicely when its in a comms rack along with the PBX - then you can patch 
voice and data to where it is needed, and change it later if required 
just by re patching.

> looks very much as if other equally clever bods up-thread have
> identified the problem (incorrect wiring) so I'll let y'all know how
> it goes.

Yup, when working with signals that are sent as a differential pair, it 
is vital to make sure they are carried by a twisted pair. Just having 
the right pins joined together is not enough at these frequencies.

> Ain't Usenet wonderful!

tis indeed! (mostly)

-- 
Cheers,

John.

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

teddysnips@hotmail.com coughed up some electrons that declared:

> Yo! Pear cider!  My man Kevin Minchew (well, he's his own man,
> actually) brews totally awesome pear cider.  Single variety, total
> headf*uck.

It was some foreign stuff (Swedish I think), but at least the brain damage
is temporary.

> Anyway, thanks for the learned exegesis about switches, routers and
> hubs.  I take the point that I've probably over-engineered the damn
> thing, but I've bought the router now so I'm stuck with it.

Not quite - you've not wasted your money. You need the router (usually part
of an ADSL modem) to get anywhere. 

The switch is optional, but does mean that you can get away with running 1
cable half way round your house instead of several, if your layout demands
it.

Cheers

Tim

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:

> The router is a Netgear ADSL Firewall Router DG834.

The DG834 has "Auto Uplink" ports which means that it eliminates the need to
worry about crossover cables. It will accommodate either type of cable and
make the appropriate internal adjustments automatically to make the right
connection.

As others have said, it looks like you just need to get the fixed wiring
sorted to ensure the wires are paired off in the right order.

-- 
Mike Clarke

"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message 
news:1221680785.32189.0@proxy01.news.clara.net...
> Ron Lowe wrote:
>>  wrote in message 
>> news:026adbd5-db60-4a22-bbd0-4875fd97a16d@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> On Sep 17, 6:31 pm, "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS>
>> wrote:
>>> "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:48d13d50$0$510$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >A photograph of the back of one of the 1-gangs is here:
>>> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2865124701/
>>>
>>> >>The wires, from left to right, top to bottom, are
>>>
>>> >>Blue; Blue/White; Orange; Green/White
>>> >>Green; Orange/White; Brown; Brown/White
>>>
>>> >>The wiring is the same on the matching socket of the 4-gang.
>>>
>>> > Looks like it's wired up totally wrong.
>>> > You need to look at the labeling under the wires.
>>>
>>> > Pin 1 is green/white.
>>> > Pin 2 is orange.
>>>
>>> > That's all wrong.
>>> > The pairs are all messed up.
>>>
>>> > You need to pull the wires out of the punch-downs and do them as >
>>> everyone
>>> > has indicated. Use the colour codes I listed.
>>>
>>> > Check both ends.
>>>
>>> > --
>>> > Ron
>>>
>>> To be more specific, it looks like the Orange/white and Green/white are
>>> swapped.
>>>
>>> Again, check all outlets, both ends.
>>
>> I have a problem with this problem, conceptually.
>>
>> When I plug my laptop directly into the router, the patch cable
>> carries the signal directly along the cable according to how the patch
>> cable is wired.
>>
>> However, if I plug the patch cable into the 4-gang wall socket, and an
>> identical patch cable from the destination 1-gang socket into my
>> laptop, surely the colour of the wires between the 4-gang and the 1-
>> gang is irrelevant, provided that the two sockets are wired the same?
>>
>> --------------------------
>>
>> NO.
>> You mis-understand a cruicial point.
>>
>> The colours do not matter, ( the electrons are colour-blind) but the fact 
>> that the pairs are twisted do.
>> Pins 1+3 MUST be from one twisted pair ( usually orng / orng-wht, but 
>> could be any colour ).
> Completely WRONG
>

Yes, Yes.

Obvious Typo.
Se my previous posts.
1+2, 3+6.
Well spotted.

But my main point was that the COLOUR of the pair doesn't actually matter.
What matters is that the pairs are maintained.

1+2, 3+6.

"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message 
news:1221680785.32189.0@proxy01.news.clara.net...
>
> Strange that you have managed to get it wrong every time, then.
>


Demonstrably facually incorrect.
Not 'every time', just on that post, as I accept.

My original posts were correct.
I'll re-post it just for the avoidance of doubt.

I'd expect it to be:

1 Orange / White
2 Solid Orange
3 Green / White
4 Solid Blue
5 Blue / White
6 Solid Green
7 Brown / White
8 Solid Brown

( The Orange twisted pair may be swapped withthe Green twisted pair on some
installations, that's OK )

What's important it the twisted pairs.
One pair ( usually orange ) is used for pins 1+2.
Another pair ( usually green ) is used for pins 3+6.
This is critical.
The blue pair and brown pair are only used on gigabit and / or PoE systems,
but these are becoming commonplace, and should be wired up correctly too.

-- 
Ron

In article <48d15513$0$507$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>,
   Tim S  wrote:
> You mate with the cheap more-or-less DC buzz-through tool (which is what
> your description sounds like) proved the pin assignments are correct.
> Those tools do not prove the cable is wired properly. Proper test kit
> costs 1000's and does time domain reflectrometry and/or other impressive
> sounding tests to prove it's right.

Perhaps it came from the same place as the 'crimp tool' he used?

-- 
*You can't teach an old mouse new clicks *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) coughed up some electrons that declared:

> In article <48d15513$0$507$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>,
>    Tim S  wrote:
>> You mate with the cheap more-or-less DC buzz-through tool (which is what
>> your description sounds like) proved the pin assignments are correct.
>> Those tools do not prove the cable is wired properly. Proper test kit
>> costs 1000's and does time domain reflectrometry and/or other impressive
>> sounding tests to prove it's right.
> 
> Perhaps it came from the same place as the 'crimp tool' he used?
> 

Silly thing is, TDR type kit would be total overkill for a few wires in a
small office or residence. It's very useful when you've laid in 400 cables
and you want to prove they're all good for gig (or even 10gig) so you don;t
spend the next n-years tracking down obscure computer faults that relate to
dodgey cabling. 

For simple installations, paying attention to the wire colours and
workmanship on the punchdowns is more than adequate to get 1000baseT
reliably without much sweat. For final testing, I patch a laptop through to
a switch where both can do gig then run a bandwidth test tool (ie flood the
link for a few minutes) then look for any errors at the interface level -
poor mans test, but at least it's realistic. 

Perhaps over-reliance on a test tool in the belief it was testing
everything?

Cheers

Tim

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:02:56 +0100, Ron Lowe wrote:

> Pins 1+3 MUST be from one twisted pair ( usually orng / orng-wht, but 
> could be any colour ).
> Pins 3+6 MUST be from another twisted pair. ( usually grn / grn-wht, but 
> again, could be any colour. )
> 
> This is absolutely crucial.
<snip> 
> You just need to do what we say.
<snip>
> I've installed these things more times than I can recount.

You better recount your pin numbers, I'm intriged by the common use of pin 
3 between two pairs. So on balance I think it's probably best if the OP 
does not "do what we say".  B-)

Looking at the picture of the socket back it does appear that the grn/wht 
and org/wht wires are transposed. Look at the colour coding blobs half 
hidden by the wires. It's normal to have adjacent terminals to be a pair 
not have them split apart. Having them apart plays havoc with the 
impedance an possibly the balance as well.

-- 
Cheers
Dave.

On 17 Sep,  
     Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> wrote:

> There are 2 "standards" for wiring cat-5 cable though - maybe he's using
> one and your patch leads use the other?

As long as both ends of the /fixed/ wiring use tthe same standards it
shouldn't matter.

-- 
  B Thumbs
  Change lycos to yahoo to reply

On 17 Sep,  
     "OG"  wrote:

> 
> Are you using crossover patch cables ? 

It shouldn't matter with reasonably up to date (less than 5yo) hardware, it
auto senses.

-- 
  B Thumbs
  Change lycos to yahoo to reply

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:58:23 +0100, Tim S wrote:

> Perhaps over-reliance on a test tool in the belief it was testing
> everything?

Probably or lack of understanding of the test tools limitations. A simple 
DC loop tester will check for correct "pairs" and a single or multiple 
*different* wiring errors would be detected. However it won't pickup the 
*same* wiring error at each end of the cable, that does require far more 
sophisticated kit to detect.

-- 
Cheers
Dave.

John Rumm wrote:

> Yup, when working with signals that are sent as a differential pair, it 
> is vital to make sure they are carried by a twisted pair. Just having 
> the right pins joined together is not enough at these frequencies.

It's also important to maintain the twisting of each pair right up as 
close as possible to the IDC terminals of the socket.  The 'as 
installed' picture provided didn't show particularly good practice in 
this respect.

Now can I ask a supplementary Ethernet question about switches while all 
the networking experts are around?   Can you cascade the cheap unmanaged 
switches /ad-infinitum/ and maintain communication between all nodes? 
For example say two ports from a typical 4-port ADSL router, R, each 
feed remote 8-port switches, A & B.  Each switch provides 7 ports used 
to connect local network devices.  In this network will a device on 
switch A be able to communicate with a device on switch B, via the 
switch in R?

-- 
Andy

Andy Wade wrote:

>> Yup, when working with signals that are sent as a differential pair, 
>> it is vital to make sure they are carried by a twisted pair. Just 
>> having the right pins joined together is not enough at these frequencies.
> 
> It's also important to maintain the twisting of each pair right up as 
> close as possible to the IDC terminals of the socket.  The 'as 
> installed' picture provided didn't show particularly good practice in 
> this respect.

Indeed. You will usually get away with it at 10Mb, and often at 100Mbit, 
but don't expect gigabit to like it!

> Now can I ask a supplementary Ethernet question about switches while all 
> the networking experts are around?   Can you cascade the cheap unmanaged 
> switches /ad-infinitum/ and maintain communication between all nodes? 

With switches - yes, there are no longer any practical limits on 
chaining segments. With older style hubs there was a limit as they acted 
as simple repeaters, and kept the whole network as a single collision 
detection zone. Hence it also had to all run at the same speed. 
Switches are smarter. While initially they will behave a little like 
hubs (in the limited sense that they will forward all packets to all 
ports), they will learn which MAC addresses are on which ports and stop 
forwarding traffic to segments unnecessarily.

> For example say two ports from a typical 4-port ADSL router, R, each 
> feed remote 8-port switches, A & B.  Each switch provides 7 ports used 
> to connect local network devices.  In this network will a device on 
> switch A be able to communicate with a device on switch B, via the 
> switch in R?

Yup, that would be fine.

-- 
Cheers,

John.

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

wrote in message 
news:01634860-e4c5-4b4d-bf9d-ccc6129d7c35@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
> install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
> the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
> there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
> who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
> install the face plates for the network points.
>
> A diagram of the network is here:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
> The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
> points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
> wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and,
> as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>
> Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
> Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
> installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
> unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>
> Thanks
>

One obvious answer is that you have patch leads with cross-overs in them. 
Assuming you haven't checked this, get two leads that work connecting the 
laptop into the router and use one of these as a patch lead. If you have 
already tried this or it still fails, maybe there's a crossover in the 
installed cables - try a patch lead with a crossover! Otherwise, in spite of 
his test, the cabling isn't correct.


-- 
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

"Andy Wade"  wrote in message 
news:6jdib4F2pd7aU1@mid.individual.net...


> Now can I ask a supplementary Ethernet question about switches while all 
> the networking experts are around?   Can you cascade the cheap unmanaged 
> switches /ad-infinitum/ and maintain communication between all nodes? For 
> example say two ports from a typical 4-port ADSL router, R, each feed 
> remote 8-port switches, A & B.  Each switch provides 7 ports used to 
> connect local network devices.  In this network will a device on switch A 
> be able to communicate with a device on switch B, via the switch in R?

Within certain limits yes.
Each switch will add a small delay.
If the total delay exceeds the protocol timeout you are using it will fail 
even though the packets are being delivered.
In practice it is a lot of switches.
I dimension the UK for switched local access once and had it put to the 
board at BT.
It was to give 100M access to every home (and 1G if paid for) but they 
didn't like it as it wasn't fibre and "the press would crucify us".
I won't tell you the estimated cost but it wasn't as expensive as the £28 
billion talked about in the press by a long way.

They did steal some of my ideas though..

like putting a wireless receiver as the termination node of the wires and 
then running a public wireless network from it.
I wouldn't be surprised if they make small water proof network switches and 
drop them down the access holes either as that was what was intended.. 
string together as many as needed to get to the end point with 100M TP teed 
off as you went.

The best one was how to power it.. obvious really just get the power from 
the customers node, its copper so getting a few watts was easy.

On 18/09/2008 09:38, dennis@home wrote:

> I dimension the UK for switched local access once and had it put to the 
> board at BT.
> It was to give 100M access to every home 

The limiting factor in that case is more likely to be the size of the 
MAC address tables in the switches.

On 17 Sep, 17:10, "Ron Lowe" <ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS>
wrote:
>  wrote in message
>
> news:01634860-e4c5-4b4d-bf9d-ccc6129d7c35@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > When we had our extension built recently, I took the opportunity to
> > install a Cat5 LAN.  Well, to be more accurate, the electrician ran
> > the cabling in but said he didn't do network wiring so the tails sat
> > there for a while until eldest son got his new laptop.  I got a friend
> > who is an experienced network engineer with his crimping tool to
> > install the face plates for the network points.
>
> > A diagram of the network is here:
>
> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/30588773@N04/2864919945/
>
> > The engineer had a wee gizmo that he plugged into the individual
> > points and then another into the 4-gang which lit up to show that the
> > wires were correctly connected.  Everything seemed fine and dandy and> > as I say, he's an experienced engineer.
>
> > Unfortunately the network doesn't work.  A laptop plugged into any of
> > the individual 1-gang outlets can't see the network.  However, if it's
> > plugged directly into the back of the router, all is fine.
>
> > Anyone any thoughts?  I bought the cable from work (we do network
> > installations, though I'm a software engineer myself) - it's
> > unshielded twisted pair, and it's what we have in our work LAN.
>
> > Thanks
>
> > Edward
>
> In addition to what the others have said ( incorrect patch cables ); can you
> unscrew the face-plates, and either take a picture or describe what wires
> have been punched down into which terminals?
>
> I'd expect it to be:
>
> 1 Orange / White
> 2 Solid Orange
> 3 Green / White
> 4 Solid Blue
> 5 Blue / White
> 6 Solid Green
> 7 Brown / White
> 8 Solid Brown
>
> ( The Orange twisted pair may be swapped withthe Green twisted pair on some
> installations, that's OK )
>
> What's important it the twisted pairs.
> One pair ( usually orange ) is used for pins 1.
> Another pair ( usually green ) is used for pins 3.
> This is critical.
> The blue pair and brown pair are only used on gigabit and / or PoE systems,
> but these are becoming commonplace, and should be wired up correctly too.
>
> A common wiring error is to use one pair for 1,
> another for 3, another for 5, another for 7.
> This will not work properly.
>
> It is essential that one twisted pair is used for 3, as described aboveThe only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

Edward

teddysnips@hotmail.com gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

> The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
> individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
> numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

A two-second google finds...
http://pinouts.ru/connectors/rj45m.gif

On 18 Sep, 09:55, Adrian  wrote:
> teddysn...@hotmail.com gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
> saying:
>
> > The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
> > individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
> > numbered on the cable, but not the socket.
>
> A two-second google finds...http://pinouts.ru/connectors/rj45m.gif

Ah, but that's the cable.  I need the socket.

Edward

Bob Mannix wrote:

> One obvious answer is that you have patch leads with cross-overs in them.

No, we've eliminated that one. His Netgear DG834 has autosensing ports that
can cope with this.

-- 
Mike Clarke

teddysnips@hotmail.com gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

>> > The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
>> > individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
>> > numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

>> A two-second google finds...http://pinouts.ru/connectors/rj45m.gif

> Ah, but that's the cable.

No, it's the plug. You've already been given the colour codes for the 
cable that correspond with which socket pin.

> I need the socket.

<holds head in hands>
D'you think that pin 1 on the cable might correspond to pin 1 on the 
socket...?

Andy Wade wrote:
> John Rumm wrote:
> 
>> Yup, when working with signals that are sent as a differential pair, 
>> it is vital to make sure they are carried by a twisted pair. Just 
>> having the right pins joined together is not enough at these frequencies.
> 
> It's also important to maintain the twisting of each pair right up as 
> close as possible to the IDC terminals of the socket.  The 'as 
> installed' picture provided didn't show particularly good practice in 
> this respect.
> 
> Now can I ask a supplementary Ethernet question about switches while all 
> the networking experts are around?   Can you cascade the cheap unmanaged 
> switches /ad-infinitum/ and maintain communication between all nodes? 
> For example say two ports from a typical 4-port ADSL router, R, each 
> feed remote 8-port switches, A & B.  Each switch provides 7 ports used 
> to connect local network devices.  In this network will a device on 
> switch A be able to communicate with a device on switch B, via the 
> switch in R?
> 
Yes. Thats the great thing about switches. They reconstitute to digital, 
and then retransmit as analogue. You will get a delay through each one, 
which makes short packet traffic a bit slower though.

wrote:

> Anyone any thoughts? 

Disconnect all patch leads.
Connect the laptop directly to the router using one of the patch leads.
Ping the router.
If that passes then get another patch lead and connect that directly to
the router and the laptop and ping the router.

With luck you now have two patch leads that you know are OK.

Patch one port on the router to the patch panel using one of the patch
leads.

Connect the laptop to the appropriate socket using the other patch lead.

Ping the router.

If that fails remove the faceplates and check wiring integrity.

Call the fuckwit who installed it and get him to fix it.

In article
,
    wrote:
> The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
> individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
> numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

The URL I gave shows this.

-- 
*Hard work pays off in the future. Laziness pays off now *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:

> The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
> individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
> numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

Most sockets have numbered and colour coded labels beside the connectors.
It's a bit hard to identify the labels from your rather dark photo but I've
put a copy on <http://www.milibyte.co.uk/socket.jpg> with the levels
adjusted to make things more visible. The wires obscure most of the labels
and numbers but it looks like the terminals are numbered and the colour
codes for both EIA 568A and 568B are shown. The connections should follow
one of these colour schemes, i.e. terminals 1 & 2 (top right) should be
either the green pair or the orange pair. If you use the orange pair on 1 &
2 then the green pair should go to 3 & 6, which I think is the bottom left.

My guess is that things should work if you offer your mate a pint to come
back with his punchdown tool and swap the green/white and orange/white
striped wires. But poke around among the wires first to see the numbers to
check this.

-- 
Mike Clarke

On 17 Sep, 16:27, teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote:

[...]

Many thanks to all of you who have tirelessly helped in the quest to
allow my peri-teenage son to watch unsuitable YouTube videos in the
privacy of his bedroom.  I'm EXTREMELY happy to report that, thanks to
your nuggets of information, there is one very red-faced network
engineer swapping Green/White and Orange/White wires even as I speak.
Job done.

Thanks again

Edward

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:
> On 17 Sep, 16:27, teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> Many thanks to all of you who have tirelessly helped in the quest to
> allow my peri-teenage son to watch unsuitable YouTube videos in the
> privacy of his bedroom.  I'm EXTREMELY happy to report that, thanks to
> your nuggets of information, there is one very red-faced network
> engineer swapping Green/White and Orange/White wires even as I speak.
> Job done.
> 
> Thanks again
> 
> Edward
> 
ROFLMAO :-)

You should point him to that video somewhere of some bloody teenager 
masturbating in front of his computer, and tell him it will make him go 
blind, or give him a permanent squint...

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:
 
> The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
> individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
> numbered on the cable, but not the socket.
 
From Mike's picture. it looks more like phone cable than cat5e to me but 
that could be because all the twists have been undone - but they don't 
look tightly twisted back at the insulation cut - is it really Cat5e 
cable? 

I'm now sure the pairs are split onto the incorrect pins of the socket. 
I can see the "1" by the wh/gr and I can't work out how the opposite 
corner connector could be the other half of the pair.

I suggest you get your friend back, asking him to do it properly and 
show him http://www.surrey.ac.uk/eng/Intranet/ict/support/UTP.HTM  The 
wiring of the socket is at the top. (and you'd think someone at 
surrey.ac.uk would spell correctly...) Don't forget to check he cuts off 
the tiny piece of each wire at the end that was used in the punch-down 
connector, so he is connecting to a fresh piece of wire - and get him to 
fit a tie-wrap as a strain relief.
-- 
John W
To mail me replace the obvious with co.uk twice

"Andy Burns"  wrote in message 
news:uvGdnZyBtf-DiE_VnZ2dnUVZ8jqdnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> On 18/09/2008 09:38, dennis@home wrote:
>
>> I dimension the UK for switched local access once and had it put to the 
>> board at BT.
>> It was to give 100M access to every home
>
> The limiting factor in that case is more likely to be the size of the MAC 
> address tables in the switches.

Not the way it was designed.
It still used IP and/or MPLS to route/switch between areas.
You could get a nice 16+2 port switch chip that supported MPLS.

The best thing was how everyone keeps telling me MPLS is a core protocol 
when it looks like it could be very useful at the edge to do things like 
switching different service types down different paths.

Another idea I see being copied is the idea of having different physical 
ports dedicated to different services so that you don't have to delve into 
the protocols to set priorities e.g. you plug your BT (IP) phone into ports 
1, video into port 2, ... , internet port 4, etc. each with a different 
plug. I never did like the idea that you needed to take a protocols apart to 
set priorities.

wrote in message 
news:e9764064-6fe1-460c-920e-08a1469bd7f4@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> The only thing missing in this feast of information is how the
> individual pins are numbered on the socket.  I can find how they're
> numbered on the cable, but not the socket.

The photo has pin numbers/colours on.
I can't see them very well because of all the wires.
You could post a pic of each end if they are different.

The Natural Philosopher coughed up some electrons that declared:

> 
> You should point him to that video somewhere of some bloody teenager
> masturbating in front of his computer, and tell him it will make him go
> blind, or give him a permanent squint...

What video would that be :-|

And how do you know about it?

<runs>

On 18 Sep 2008 09:16:44 GMT, Adrian wrote:

> <holds head in hands>
> D'you think that pin 1 on the cable might correspond to pin 1 on the 
> socket...?

You could assume that but it is not a safe assumption. BT type telephone 
connectors have arse about face numbering between the scoket and the plug.

-- 
Cheers
Dave.

"Dave Liquorice"  gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying:

>> <holds head in hands>
>> D'you think that pin 1 on the cable might correspond to pin 1 on the
>> socket...?

> You could assume that but it is not a safe assumption. BT type telephone
> connectors have arse about face numbering between the scoket and the
> plug.

That's BT, though...

teddysnips@hotmail.com wrote:
> Many thanks to all of you who have tirelessly helped in the quest to
> allow my peri-teenage son to watch unsuitable YouTube videos in the
> privacy of his bedroom.  

Just wait till he discovers xtube. ;-)

Owain

"Dave Liquorice"  wrote in message 
news:nyyfbegfubjuvyypbz.k7ddku3.pminews@srv1.howhill.net...
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:02:56 +0100, Ron Lowe wrote:
>
>> Pins 1+3 MUST be from one twisted pair ( usually orng / orng-wht, but
>> could be any colour ).
>> Pins 3+6 MUST be from another twisted pair. ( usually grn / grn-wht, but
>> again, could be any colour. )
>>
>> This is absolutely crucial.
> <snip>
>> You just need to do what we say.
> <snip>
>> I've installed these things more times than I can recount.
>
> You better recount your pin numbers, I'm intriged by the common use of pin
> 3 between two pairs. So on balance I think it's probably best if the OP
> does not "do what we say".  B-)
>
> Looking at the picture of the socket back it does appear that the grn/wht
> and org/wht wires are transposed. Look at the colour coding blobs half
> hidden by the wires. It's normal to have adjacent terminals to be a pair
> not have them split apart. Having them apart plays havoc with the
> impedance an possibly the balance as well.
>
> -- 
> Cheers
> Dave.
>
>
>


Yes indeed, one typo, as has already been ack'd.
Of course we don't use pin 3 twice over.

My original post is correct, concerning what wires go where.

R.

"Andy Wade"  wrote in message 
news:6jdib4F2pd7aU1@mid.individual.net...
> John Rumm wrote:
>
>> Yup, when working with signals that are sent as a differential pair, it 
>> is vital to make sure they are carried by a twisted pair. Just having the 
>> right pins joined together is not enough at these frequencies.
>
> It's also important to maintain the twisting of each pair right up as 
> close as possible to the IDC terminals of the socket.  The 'as installed' 
> picture provided didn't show particularly good practice in this respect.
>
> Now can I ask a supplementary Ethernet question about switches while all 
> the networking experts are around?   Can you cascade the cheap unmanaged 
> switches /ad-infinitum/ and maintain communication between all nodes? For 
> example say two ports from a typical 4-port ADSL router, R, each feed 
> remote 8-port switches, A & B.  Each switch provides 7 ports used to 
> connect local network devices.  In this network will a device on switch A 
> be able to communicate with a device on switch B, via the switch in R?
>
> -- 
> Andy


More or less.

Try to maintain a 'tree' structure, and avoid any loops in the topology. 
( ie there being 2 different routes between any 2 switches, for example 
running a cable from A to B in your example, when there's already a route 
via R  )

Smarter switches will handle looped topology correctly, ( and indeed will 
use this for redundancy ) using the 'spanning tree protocol', but cheap 
switches will probably not, and this can result in odd behaviour where some 
packets accelerate in a clockwise direction, colliding with an 
anti-clockwise beam of packets.   The resulting black hole will eat the 
server room.

-- 
Ron

Ron Lowe wrote:

> 
> 
> In addition to what the others have said ( incorrect patch cables ); can 
> you unscrew the face-plates, and either take a picture or describe what 
> wires have been punched down into which terminals?
> 
> I'd expect it to be:
> 
> 1 Orange / White
> 2 Solid Orange
> 3 Green / White
> 4 Solid Blue
> 5 Blue / White
> 6 Solid Green
> 7 Brown / White
> 8 Solid Brown
> 

Er, well then, you'd be wr