The garage in the OP has its own service coming from a different pole than the other building. There would be no connection between the buildings’ ground rods.
Network cable from house to detached garage
- Thread starter derekeh
- Start date
The garage in the OP has its own service coming from a different pole than the other building. There would be no connection between the buildings’ ground rods.
DC73
Well-known member
I may be nuts but I'm not making stuff up. I did a stint as a power quality engineer and saw this happen all the time. It's just physics.
Correct. Which is why one of my solutions above was to bond the grounding points of the two services. I think jeepxj missed that point.
DC
I measured a straight line shot from the garage to the back of my house and its 97 ft. Standing in front of the garage, I show 60% signal and 26 mbps. As soon as I step in the garage, I lose connection. I guess this is due to the metal siding. My router is a netgear wnr1000 from 2012 so its probably time to upgrade to something else while im at it.
Was not all that long ago when .........They sold multiple CAT cables to every room in the home and it was to be future proof.........how did the work out
Sorry but wifi solution has proven to have merit as a solution for outbuildings .......that is cost effecttive and very simple.
Was not all that long ago when .........They sold multiple CAT cables to every room in the home and it was to be future proof.........how did the work out
Sorry but wifi solution has proven to have merit as a solution for outbuildings .......that is cost effecttive and very simple.
I think it's great. you can do basically anything with them. stick another AP in for better wifi coverage, use an HDMI-cat5 converter for mirroring TVs, plugging in a gaming PC, and so on.
OccupantRJ
Well-known member
Exactly. This is why I have both wired and WiFi throughout. I installed wire first and then added WiFi routers wherever I want. It was great when I added a camera system to the shop. My sons come to visit and grab a wire to download games that take too long at their houses.
for a farm the pole in the yard is the meter can. I suppose they don't bury the ground rods there, rather at the panel locations. that does make sense.
12 strand fiber it is.
Wired and WiFi is exactly the same speed in my home and shop.
Shop Camera connection 150kbps HD.
ripperd
Well-known member
Your are obviously not moving around gigabytes of files then...
In actual usage gigabit ethernet is way, way faster than WiFi, especially over any kind of distance. Some WiFi can hit near gigabit speeds, but that is inhibited very quickly once you are a few walls and 50' away from the access point.
I have a point to point wifi setup between two buildings. Its ghetto as can be yet somehow works great:
Thats plenty of bandwidth for 5 security cameras, VOIP phone and a dozen people streaming youtube.
total cost: 120 bucks. max distance spec says 5km.
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
I highly doubt that unless youre not running gigabit on the wired connection.
You'd be hard pressed to push gigabit speeds on a wireless connection...
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
I have a point to point wifi setup between two buildings. Its ghetto as can be yet somehow works great:
Thats plenty of bandwidth for 5 security cameras, VOIP phone and a dozen people streaming youtube.
total cost: 120 bucks. max distance spec says 5km.
what brand of radios are you using?
the pics did not load.
I think he was referring to his practical use case of a camera streaming the same 150kbps over wifi and hard wired connections.
They do many some air fiber stuff that gets 2.2gbps OTA but its big bucks and not needed for any shop use. unless you're running a factory.
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
Yeah i know all about air fibers. Ive installed many of them.
sennister
Well-known member
Yeah I have done that before. Not sure I have tried 250' but I have done it with a really light line tied to a sandwich bag and used an air compressor. Then use that line to pull something stronger to then pull electrical wire.
I must have missed the comment about not pulling on the terminated end and that was my main concern. If you are going to break the fiber, pulling on the terminated end is going to be the easiest point to screw the job up and unless you want to pay someone to come out and put a new termination on it, your fiber run is now useless. Not sure what it would cost to put a new end on it. It isn't hard but I don't have to tools to do it and they are not cheap.
sennister
Well-known member
Get in those ranges and you are dealing with the curvature of the earth. Unless you are a flat earther that is...
I agree that longer ranges are very possible. I remember him using a website or software that he loaded in the two points to calculate how much height he would need to avoid terrain. The farther you go the taller the tower needs to be to compensate for curvature or just general terrain. For his 7 mile shot it was relatively flat so just a normal antenna mount on the top of a two story house on each end gave him enough height from what I recall. It was a few years ago he set it up. He also used my lensatic compass to shoot an azimuth in mils rather than degrees to get the antenna close enough to get a signal then fine tuned from there.
sennister
Well-known member
I have a point to point wifi setup between two buildings. Its ghetto as can be yet somehow works great:
Thats plenty of bandwidth for 5 security cameras, VOIP phone and a dozen people streaming youtube.
total cost: 120 bucks. max distance spec says 5km.
Not sure I would call a Ubiquiti setup like that ghetto.
If you said you were using a couple Linksys WRT54G routers running DD-WRT with Pringle can directional antennas, that would be ghetto. It would still work but would fall in the Ghetto category in my eyes.
While Ubiquiti is cheaper than say Cisco, for home use I would take Ubiquiti any day. I got into a discussion with a Network Engineer about this a while back. She scoffed at Ubiquity and said he only used Cisco gear. I asked is it better to use retired Cisco gear with out of date firmware that has known vulnerabilities and no support or Ubiquiti that is fully patched and has support? Cost wise it is about the same but I don't need a Cisco Technet subscription. I think he saw my point. It is a matter of looking at it from the Network Engineer eyes or the Security Analyst.
BentBierz
Well-known member
Hello...I am FAR from an expert in this area but have tried to do my due diligence in researching a hardwire install for a several-year home renovation that includes hardwiring (through conduit) within walls to various rooms and to run a network out to a steel building about 60 feet from the house. Some of my research has also involved talking to a very smart techie I work with for the Coast Guard.
Inside the house I had initially planned to go with Cat 6 but after reading a few articles (this one in particular: https://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/is-your-cat6-a-dog.htm) I decided to run 5e; everything is in conduit in the walls so I can pull newer cable at a later date if I choose to. Is the article truth or fiction...not certain but decided that I could terminate 5e with better results than 6 given other articles I had read as well.
Between the house and steel building I plan to run fiber and already have the conduit buried to do it...I am currently trying to figure out what equipment I need to run between the two buildings. It will eventually come together but every time I read a thread like this I realize how much of a neophyte I truly am when it comes to networking.
Inside the house I had initially planned to go with Cat 6 but after reading a few articles (this one in particular: https://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/is-your-cat6-a-dog.htm) I decided to run 5e; everything is in conduit in the walls so I can pull newer cable at a later date if I choose to. Is the article truth or fiction...not certain but decided that I could terminate 5e with better results than 6 given other articles I had read as well.
Between the house and steel building I plan to run fiber and already have the conduit buried to do it...I am currently trying to figure out what equipment I need to run between the two buildings. It will eventually come together but every time I read a thread like this I realize how much of a neophyte I truly am when it comes to networking.
Last edited:
dcg9381
Well-known member
I've used these also with great success, however, I'd say that they are not the simplest things to setup (they require some level of networking skills).
Personally, I'd absolutely do the Cat5E or CAT6 in 3/4" conduit - it's simple and dead reliable. I'd probably drop 3 wires in, just for whatever...
Running fiber seems nuts to me - and I do some networking. I'd rather "bond" the ethernet if we're going to get crazy.
thank you for believing in my mounting solutions. I know I put my heart and soul into them.
Ahhh yes. cisco engineers who think the world can only run on cisco. they're going to be in for a real shock with SDN taking off like crazy cause of the cloud providers.
slowTA
Well-known member
A co-worker had an idea. Why not just bury co-axial cable (assuming that's how your TV and internet provider gets you your signal)? Then you can split the cable for a TV and cable modem in the garage.
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
The OP would have to pay for a second internet service then....
slowTA
Well-known member
If he puts a splitter in the co-axial cable in the house then runs a cable out to the garage with another cable modem ($60), I don't see why he would need another service.
My current ISP put a splitter on the co-ax cable between my cable box on the TV and cable modem. Would a second cable modem (I've confirmed that the cable company doesn't set up or otherwise modify an off the shelf cable modem) require another ISP subscription?
slowTA
Well-known member
If the OP wants a cable box in the garage for a TV then that would just be an additional cable box fee.
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
The way my ISP(comcast) works is they provide service based on cable modem MAC addresses. So if i setup a second modem, I would most definitely have to pay for a second service.
But really that is pointless with the fact that the OP would not be able to access resources in the garage via the house or vice versa.
Adding a second cable modem just makes things more complicated and is a waste when its really easy to just run an ethernet line to the garage.
lweeks
Member
For similar reasons, I likewise chose to go with cat5e at home. It will support 1000BASE-T as well as 2.5GBASE-T. Apparently it's ok with 5GBASE-T for shorter runs as well. For my home "backbone" between my small wall mounted network cabinet and my larger basement rack distribution switches, I moved to fiber last year when I did some other work.
In our data centers, we have moved from self-terminated twisted pair patch cables to a "cable store" model, as the quality of on-site termination became an issue with cat6. We now have bins of various pre-made lengths of cat6 cables, in addition to our twinax and fiber. We developed software to calculate the nearest appropriate cable length given rack cabinet and U positions.
lweeks
Member
Cisco at the enterprise core and edge, where you need their features and the TAC support. At the distribution and rack layers though, SDN and and "white box" networking for sure is accelerating. We're deploying VMware NSX for enterprise cloud. You pay a VMware tax instead of a Cisco tax, and need compute, but you do gain some definite advantages.
Ubiquiti and Mikrotik are both significant players in the small wireless ISP markets, especially overseas, and both make good equipment. I have gear from both. Interoperates fine with my HPE and Cisco gear. For a residential or small business environment, I wouldn't hesitate to use Ubiquiti kit, especially wireless AP. Mikrotik requires more technical immersion to use, but very featureful gear for the money.
If I didn't have the opportunity to run fiber between buildings on my property, I'd certainly deploy a Ubiquiti based point to point bridge.
While most cable ISP allows you to provide your own cable modem, they would have to authorize the cable modem to access the internet.... At least for my ISP, cablevision/Altice ... or something now is like that... they authorized your cable modem box by one of the MAC addresses... you can't just plugin any cable modem that you like and have service, you can actually get to their network... and stops at their provisioning (limbo) area... So if OP were to go this route, he/she might want to check with their ISP first, It's just not the same as good ole days of analog cable TV any more..... It has to be authorized, and most likely they wanted a additional monthly FEE ...
I would just run a separate 3/4 or 1" pvc between the buildings just for data / low voltage lines... that way I can future proof all I wanted....just make sure you use the right 90's and 45s made for electrical... and no LBs used bury under ground.. keep in mind also that if you do fiber, it can't handle sharp bends.... unless something changed ...past 10 years. Who knows what the next future of communication is after fiber, all we know, it could be compress hot air , and 1" PVC you can run an compressed air as well
...IMO going fiber now under normal circumstance is a waste of $$$ on bleeding edge .... you just don't needed that much data speed.... but hey, you never know next live streaming garagepornhub might be in some guy's garage...
and WylieDisels brings out a point, that they are now 2 internet connection (lets say your isp allows it for a fee), it's harder to share files, unless you do some funky things like VPN/Cloud services etc things.
There are these MoCa over Ethernet things if you still wanted to run coax... but you better get some nice coaxs ....and not some run of the mill things from 99Cent stores..
lweeks
Member
I would just run a separate 3/4 or 1" pvc between the buildings just for data / low voltage lines... that way I can future proof all I wanted....just make sure you use the right 90's and 45s made for electrical... and no LBs used bury under ground.. keep in mind also that if you do fiber, it can't handle sharp bends.... unless something changed ...past 10 years. Who knows what the next future of communication is after fiber, all we know, it could be compress hot air , and 1" PVC you can run an compressed air as well
IMO going fiber now under normal circumstance is a waste of $$$ on bleeding edge .... you just don't needed that much data speed.... but hey, you never know next live streaming garagepornhub might be in some guy's garage...
Modern fiber is "bend insensitive" -- you can wrap it around a 10mm diameter tube and it's ok.
Given that you can buy a ton of cheap consumer switches on Amazon with SFP ports, including a $45 Trend switch, I don't think fiber is all that bleeding edge any more... I paid $80.00 total for 4 HPE compatible SFPs and two 30 meter OM4 MMO cables a couple years ago. Just checked, that'd be $68.00 now. If those prices are going to break the bank... hopefully that compressed hot air transport is cheaper.
AWS, MS, Google are really going all in on their own hardware. I think cisco will retain the edge in the iron for big biz that keeps their own DC's going and for large deployments in the 500+ seat offices. But for the real players of the internet they left cisco behind long ago.
After deploying a Ubiquiti based pTp I cannot suggest it enough. incredibly easy, stable and plenty of bandwidth.
lweeks
Member
Cisco can read the writing on the wall, and they're absolutely working to adapt and compete. See:
https://www.fiercetelecom.com/telecom/verizon-simplifies-edge-control-cisco-juniper-networks-routers
Cisco has a lot of value in their NXOS/IOS heritage (and a lot of baggage to be sure!) and their TAC support. Hardware will certainly commoditize at the edge/core, as it already is internally. But I wouldn't expect to see Cisco or Juniper (which already had a head start on Cisco) leave the field. The truly huge players who have value in rolling their own, like a Google or Amazon, will. But I doubt the transit service providers will. Expect instead to see standardized commodity hardware with open vendor software and support. Big enterprise vendors (HP, Dell) are also working quickly toward vertical integration, rolling out their own SDN products (with hardware -- Dell has VMware NSX already of course).
Interesting times... run fiber to your garage, so you (and all your IoT connected garage toys) can participate eventually.
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
Im aware of that.
However, using MoCa adds cost and another point of failure.
It would only make sense to use it when CoAx is the only available cable.
In cases like the OP's, where he has a choice of which cable to run, it really makes no sense at all to run CoAx and then have to use MoCa converters. Cost wise, it would be more to do so.
Also, the person i was replying to was not talking about MoCa but instead adding a second cable modem...