How far can you run an ethernet cable

[mebedave]

My shop is about 200' from my house. Can I run an ethernet cable from my router in my house to my shop for internet access,or is that too far?

 

[kkenney]

total with patch cords is 300 meters

 

[SimS]

The max Cat5/Cat6 cable length is 100 meters. Approximately 300 feet so you should be good to go at 200. Going wireless could work too.

SimS

 

[Brad750]

if you are running it outdoors of even burying it you should get the underground cat 5 or 6. It is designed to withstand the elements.

The maximum length of a cat 5 or 6 run from what I have read is 328' More than that you suffer bandwith problems.

 

[NitroPress]

I would run it directly from a good quality router or switch to same on the other end, to ensure a clean signal. Not all ethernet ports/cards on equipment are as robust as those in routing gear. It may seem like overkill to run it from, say, your cable or DSL modem to an adjacent switch, then through the long run to another switch, and from there to a computer, but it will improve your reliability and transfer speeds.

 

[PurdueSD]

330 feet total

 

[offroadsteve]

What they all said regarding length, but with a long underground run like that i'd recommend putting a surge arrestor on at least one end to keep your routing gear from getting fried by lightning (we lost 3 routers and 2 NIC's in our old house where we had a long underground run).

something like this: http://www.apc.com/resource/include/techspec_index.cfm?base_sku=pnet1gb

 

[79firebird]

Most you would wont to go would be 400 feet. ive gone that far but i had a router on both ends it was gigabit. just go with the out door cableing not the indoor one

 

[cashishift]

i wouldn't just run one either... cables fail.

 

[warrend]

300 feet or so is the norm for good signal like everyone else has said. I second the lightning protection and using cable rated for direct burial. It is filled with a gel that protects the cable for moisture.....mess to work with though.

After loosing equipment to lightning strikes I used bought from these guys.

http://www.l-com.com/productcenter....|13766471157&gclid=CIL0uv2lrKwCFQaFQAodhiAG_g

Good commericial quality stuff.

 

[W_A_Watson_II]

I'm at about 320', under ground with Cat-6 in conduit. Had a weak notebook port, and had to use a router in the shop. When the notebook was replaced with a desktop, I was able to remove the router.

 

[Bryan83taco]

200 ft may slow it down a bit. If you have the money I suggest running fiber with two media converters on each end (cat 5 to fiber). That will speed it up.

 

[Gary S]

i wouldn't just run one either... cables fail.

True, but even on their worst day, copper cable beats wireless.

 

[NitroPress]

True, but even on their worst day, copper cable beats wireless.

+1. Hell, +2.

I have years and years of experience with both methods and love the convenience of wireless when it works... but for never-screw-with-it-again reliability, copper is the only way to go. Run extra cables while you're doing the lay and it will be decades before you need to do anything but switch to a different line.

 

[NitroPress]

200 ft may slow it down a bit.

No, it won't. The only reason ethernet ever slows down is from poor connections or insufficiently rated cable. A 200-foot run with Cat6 cable and a router/switch at both ends will pose no speed limitation at all. Fiber's fine, but rather costly and unnecessary unless you need extremely high speeds (way over gigabit) or very long runs (thousands of feet).

You do have to use good quality gear for long runs - you won't get by with recycled Cat3 hooked to a cheap modem on one end and a marginal equipment port on the other, but such a rig wouldn't work well over 6 feet, either.

 

[Zeke]

I don't understand. I know length = resistance, but doesn't the signal come off cable strung for miles? Are there boosters? For within the home?

 

[Falcon67]

I don't understand. I know length = resistance, but doesn't the signal come off cable strung for miles? Are there boosters? For within the home?

You can't string Ethernet for miles. 328' (100m) @ 100BASE-T and 1000BASE-T with Cat5 shielded and up. If you need to go farther, you convert to something else. Miles would be single mode fiber. They sell various extenders or you could use a cheap router or switch but that will peter out somewhere between 1000' and 8000' or so.

 

[jeffmoss26]

100 meters or 328 feet.

 

[porcupine73]

What happens is if the cable is too long, the signal to noise ratio becomes too high and the equipment is unable to work with the signal.

I would personally consider fiber for a run like that, maybe with just media converters at each end, because it gives you a degree of isolation. Sometimes with long runs there can be odd issues with ground loops or different potentials with respect to ground. Usually that happens more if the two buildings are supplied by different transformers though.

 

[ddawg16]

200' Is not an issue.

100 Meters (328') is the spec....but in reality, with proper connections....5-600' would work just as well. I've done it.

The spec for RS-232 is 50' max....I've ran it 250' without issues.

Regarding cable....Cat5E has the same freq limit as Cat6. Cat6 is just spec'd for noisy installations....like running it in a cable tray with AC.

 

[Falcon67]

What happens is if the cable is too long, the signal to noise ratio becomes too high and the equipment is unable to work with the signal.

The signal eventually attenuates and you get dropped/lost packets or even interfaces going up/down at random.

I will say that we have lots of older Cat5 cable here at work and we know some runs are at or maybe even over the limit a bit. Especially in my building, which used to be a library. Newer pulls since 2001 all meet IEEE standards but before that, eh - something. We're running 1000BASE-T to many machines over that iffy cabling and it's working fine. Of course, we have commercial grade Cisco or Dell switching equipment on both ends.

 

[jeffmoss26]

Not true. Cat6 is rated for faster speeds. Shielded is used for noisy areas.

 

[rlitman]

The signal eventually attenuates and you get dropped/lost packets or even interfaces going up/down at random.

Nope. Ethernet's length limitations on copper have nothing to do with signal degradation or quality.
It actually has to do with the speed that the signal propagates over the wire.
Data is transmitted in discrete packets, with a pause between them, and the sender must wait for a response. Packets have a maximum length, because a response is expected in a fixed window of time. As the wire length increases, it takes longer for the packet to reach the destination (and for the response to return). After a point, the packets take too long to return, and the network fails.
10BaseT has ten times the bit timing, so it can effectively work over ten times the length. If you're cable is borderline long, you can switch your system to use 10BaseT, and that should fix it.

Cat6 cable won't have any advantage for these distances.

Now, if you're running 1000BaseT, then there -can- be a difference between Cat5 cable (and connections), and Cat5e. Cat5e will work for 1000BaseT, whereas Cat5 will more than likely work, for shorter runs.

 

[LoRollinLS]

I would run it directly from a good quality router or switch to same on the other end, to ensure a clean signal. Not all ethernet ports/cards on equipment are as robust as those in routing gear. It may seem like overkill to run it from, say, your cable or DSL modem to an adjacent switch, then through the long run to another switch, and from there to a computer, but it will improve your reliability and transfer speeds.

Very good response. I went to college for Communications and I couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[NitroPress]

Cat6 cable won't have any advantage for these distances.

Cat 5e and Cat 6 are virtually the same price in small quantities (= 1 spool). It might be worth using only the grade needed for a commercial installation, but if you're going to go buy a spool, it's hard to argue against the slightly better characteristics of 6, essentially for free.

If you get it cheap or have it, 5e is fine for nearly everything a DIYer needs.

 

[Big-Foot]

You may want to consider or reconsider a wireless solution... I just got a new Netgear N900 and the range so far is phenomenal.. I was considering using a 110v network carrier solution to get the signal to my shop. I think this will work better.. Just my $.02 worth..

 

[nathank]

I would run it directly from a good quality router or switch to same on the other end, to ensure a clean signal. Not all ethernet ports/cards on equipment are as robust as those in routing gear. It may seem like overkill to run it from, say, your cable or DSL modem to an adjacent switch, then through the long run to another switch, and from there to a computer, but it will improve your reliability and transfer speeds.

Definitely do this.

 

[78Bird]

Limits arent an issue, he's at ~200', well under it. use underground rated cable if you bury it, and it'll work like a charm. Shouldn't even need the dual routers at that distance unless the NIC is really crappy.

 

[NitroPress]

The main reason I'd recommend a couple of dedicated switches is that any reasonably good ones (Netgear, D-Link, on up to commercial gear) will handle ping delays, noise, etc. far better than the adapters built into most equipment. Switches have faster processors and redundancy to clean up and boost packet handling; NICs don't. Most OEM NICs and equipment ports are for the cheapest short-haul use, like ten feet to the switch.

You can save that $100-150, but it will pay off in faster, more reliable connections overall, especially if you're going to run more than one network item at the far end. Unless your incoming modem is routed only to the shop, you're going to need something to 'plex out the cabling anyway.

 

[orangefury]

I would run fiber between the buildings then use a transceiver to connect up to the switches. Switches like the cisco catalyst or HP procurve.

 

[Gary S]

You can't string Ethernet for miles. 328' (100m) @ 100BASE-T and 1000BASE-T with Cat5 shielded and up. If you need to go farther, you convert to something else. Miles would be single mode fiber. They sell various extenders or you could use a cheap router or switch but that will peter out somewhere between 1000' and 8000' or so.

Absolutely correct. Ethernet has the 100meter limit. To run a cable for miles, you need a different protocol from ethernet. Ethernet is a digital signal for computers.

DSL can be run for miles because it is an analog signal to a modem. DSL is a totally different world from ethernet. Even through DSL stands for digital subscriber link, it uses an analog modulated signal to carry the digital signal. This is where we get Modem (modulator-demodulator), and the ethernet protocol isn't modulated like DSL.

 

[Charles (in GA)]

if you are running it outdoors of even burying it you should get the underground cat 5 or 6. It is designed to withstand the elements.

The maximum length of a cat 5 or 6 run from what I have read is 328' More than that you suffer bandwith problems.

This is the same number you will find almost anywhere (on the net or in appropriate documents) for max ethernet distance.

Charles

 

[SuperSocket]

i wouldn't just run one either... cables fail.

No they really don't, hardly ever. The only thing that fails them is improper installation, care, or movement around them that damages the cables.




328' is about your max but you can really push this further, it just really depends on a lot of factors, equipment, and conditions. 328 is a maximum recommendation but I have seen 500 approached before (at this point it's a **** shoot if it will work properly or not).


You can also buy in-line repeaters for this task which are basically just hubs/switches with a port on each end.

Fiber would be your best bet, it is cheap and easy to install in a conduit and you have less electrical problems from grounding differences and surges... plus you do not really need to care about the distance unless if you're a land baron or something

 

[NitroPress]

I would run fiber between the buildings then use a transceiver to connect up to the switches. Switches like the cisco catalyst or HP procurve.

I guess if connecting his shop is worth a four-figure bill...

 

[SuperSocket]

Absolutely correct. Ethernet has the 100meter limit. To run a cable for miles, you need a different protocol from ethernet. Ethernet is a digital signal for computers.

DSL can be run for miles because it is an analog signal to a modem. DSL is a totally different world from ethernet. Even through DSL stands for digital subscriber link, it uses an analog modulated signal to carry the digital signal. This is where we get Modem (modulator-demodulator), and the ethernet protocol isn't modulated like DSL.

Ethernet is the term to describe the communication family type. Ethernet has an incredible distance as it's only limited by it's repeaters and meduim technologies.


Twister copper like as in CAT5 has the 100 limitations, fiber does not. The medium is not dependent on the protocol used, you can use quite a few protocols over various forms of ethernet products.

DSL uses plain old telephone service lines or POTS lines, which are just single pair copper runs. The runs can vary in distance but since they are just dry contacts they can push great distances (which is why they have speed limitations based on distances). DSL is highly dependent on the quality of copper you have running to your property and the distance you are away from he nearest CO or VRAD box... so while it might be fast, it is really all up to how far you are aware from those locations... you could even be within the range for your DSL product and not be eligible due to poor wiring or poor signal quality. DSL's maximum range is IDSL which is about 38,000 feet or 7 miles approx... slow too.

 

[SuperSocket]

I guess if connecting his shop is worth a four-figure bill...

Fiber is cheap, you will spend more money on the conduit to protect it than the fiber itself.


The switches on each end are also cheap, but I would not recommend anything like Cisco or HP for a home user. Any switch with a fiber port will work... a converter would be even easier.


Just need two of these:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/330623168589


And need something like this fiber:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/160675304997


And you're all set to go.... don't forget to put it in some sort of conduit.

 

[DodgeZ]

True, but even on their worst day, copper cable beats wireless.

Wireless works fine if you use good gear and set it up right.

Regarding cable....Cat5E has the same freq limit as Cat6. Cat6 is just spec'd for noisy installations....like running it in a cable tray with AC.

Cat5e and Cat6 aren't the same frequency. IIRC cat5 is 100mhz and cat6 is 250mhz

Nope. Ethernet's length limitations on copper have nothing to do with signal degradation or quality.
It actually has to do with the speed that the signal propagates over the wire.
Data is transmitted in discrete packets, with a pause between them, and the sender must wait for a response. Packets have a maximum length, because a response is expected in a fixed window of time. As the wire length increases, it takes longer for the packet to reach the destination (and for the response to return). After a point, the packets take too long to return, and the network fails.
10BaseT has ten times the bit timing, so it can effectively work over ten times the length. If you're cable is borderline long, you can switch your system to use 10BaseT, and that should fix it.

Cat6 cable won't have any advantage for these distances.

Now, if you're running 1000BaseT, then there -can- be a difference between Cat5 cable (and connections), and Cat5e. Cat5e will work for 1000BaseT, whereas Cat5 will more than likely work, for shorter runs.

Switch work with frames not packets. For cabling we are talking about layer1 which is going to play with voltages to signal 1 and 0s so the other side can build a frame. Attenuation does become a factor in long runs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MLT-3_encoding

Most OEM NICs and equipment ports are for the cheapest short-haul use, like ten feet to the switch.

ahhhh what kind of OEM are you buying?

Absolutely correct. Ethernet has the 100meter limit. To run a cable for miles, you need a different protocol from ethernet. Ethernet is a digital signal for computers.

Ethernet runs over fiber.





If you only have to go 200 feet an outdoor cat6 cable will get the job done. Once the cable is in the garage you can connect the PC or hook it up to a switch/router/AP (disable the router part).

I light up my house, garage and even the outside shed with WiFi. I use the Wi-Fi for my laptop, tablet and phone. I use to have a hardwired garage PC though.

 

[Falcon67]

>Ethernet runs over fiber.
Good point - distance limits apply to the physical medium.

>Fiber is cheap, you will spend more money on the conduit to protect it than the fiber itself.
Terminating it properly is not, and transiting from wired to fiber is not really either. We have 75,000 feet of it installed and try very hard NOT to do that ourselves. If it's not terminated right, you got nothing.

>Wireless works fine if you use good gear and set it up right.
And your RF environment allows it.

 

[orangefury]

You can get used 2950's with fiber module for less than $150 and procurves for even less. If you wanted gbE then you could use the power connect although it does protect against STP. I wouldn't use any type of unmanaged switch.

 

[NitroPress]

Fiber is cheap, you will spend more money on the conduit to protect it than the fiber itself.

Cat 5e/6 cable is about 8-10 cents a foot even at retail spool price. Running two or three lines for redundancy is the cost of one spool or even less.

Fiber runs at least twice that and for all its reliability, I'd want to run duplicates. It's starting to get not-so-cheap...

Just need two of these:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/330623168589

Yeah, I love that Chinese **** - you can always spot it from the weird typeface they use. I don't know of any decent fiber converters for less than about $100 - and those are single-port, meaning (tadaaaa!) he's going to need a switch on each end anyway. Or at least one.

No point in using ChinEbay garbage for even the most casual job here... he may as well go get two $40 wireless units and put up with the endless connection hassles. Cost will be proportional to usefulness.

OTOH, an $80 spool of Cat6 and two $50 4-port switches - make 'em gigabit Ethernet and gain a little house-to-shop bandwidth, at least between systems if not out the internet port - and you've got bulletproof, redundant, upgradeable connectivity for the next decade.