Re: Best splitter to use

On Jun 1, 4:31 pm, Dennis Ferguson <dcfergu...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2009-06-01, Denis McMahon <denis.m.f.mcma...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Given that whatever I do will involve running Cat5 from the master
socket area to the network hub, I think I have the following options:

a) relocate the modem to the master socket, run ethernet over the the
new cat5.
b) run the dsl over the new cat 5, leave the modem where it is.

(a) is obviously preferred.

I don't think (a) is preferred over (b), either works fine.  What
you want to accomplish is a little different.

What you need to do to optimize the ADSL

Yes, I know what I need to do, thanks. I also know what I want to
accomplish. I'm seeking opinions on some specific aspects of achieving
what I want to accomplish.

The internal phone wiring is not stubs to each socket. The sockets are
linked in a chain from 1 (master) through 2 (bedroom), then 3 (living
room, where the computers are and the modem is currently) to 4 (living
room, unused).

See, that was a mistake on your part. You assumed radial stub wiring.

Because the wiring is a chain, and I have already established that
using the existing wiring costs me 1 mbit/sec over running a dedicated
utp telephony connection from the master socket, I do, whatever I
decide, need to run a new cable. The new cable might carry ethernet or
adsl, which is one of the choices I have. This is the "a or b" choice
in my first post.

a - put the modem by the master socket, and carry ethernet over the
cat 5.
b - carry the adsl over the cat 5, and keep the modem by the
computers.

Ok, I could run cw1301 instead of cat5, as I have plenty of both to
hand, but cat5 gives me more options, especially if I try b and then
decide to try a. cw 1301 won't support ethernet (well, it might manage
10 mbit/sec, on a good day, with a following wind, downhill, when
lubricated).

To do this you should install a Master Faceplate Splitter like
the one on this page (linked to in another reply):

   http://www.solwise.co.uk/adsl_splitters.htm

Yes, I'm looking at options for the splitter. The post title kind of
gives away that one issue facing me is that I'm finding it hard to
choose between:

i) adslnation "XTE-2005 Master Faceplate"

ii) clarity "Modified BT NTE5 Master ADSL Adaptor" (or even the
standard BT one)

iii) The solwise adsl splitter mentioned elsewhere. I suspect that
functionally this may be the same as the clarity.

iv) The austin taylor splitter, also available from solwise.

You obviously think I didn't realise I needed a splitter, as you may
have surmised by now, that would have been an error on your part.

Once you've done this I think all options for getting the ADSL
to the modem are about equivalent:

(1) Plug the modem directly into the RJ11 in the faceplate with
    a standard patch cable (RJ11's on both ends) and run ethernet
    over the Cat5 from the modem to where ever the computers are;

Yes, this is my option a.

(2) Terminate one of the pairs in the Cat5 you are installing with
    an RJ11 plug, plug that into the faceplate and put the modem
    at the far end of the Cat5 cable (essentially making the Cat5
    cable a long patch cable); or

And wow, this is my option b.

(3) If the existing telephone socket where you'd like to locate
    the modem is by itself on a cable which runs back to the
    master socket, separate that cable from the rest of your voice
    wiring, put an RJ11 on the pair, plug that into the master
    socket and plug the modem into the wall socket.  The Cat5
    cable may then be unnecessary.

No, this isn't an option, see above.

I don't think it matters much what kind of patch cable is used
to connect from the master socket to the modem as long as you are
using twisted pair telephony cable.

Now this is the only part of your whole post that actually addressed
anything that I actually asked, and to be honest, given the rest of
your post, your contribution is questionable anyway.

ADSL signals are low frequency
compared to LAN signalling, the Cat5 cable is overkill for ADSL
(but certainly won't hurt) and the difference between fancy shielded
RJ11 patch cables and the flat stuff that came with the modem really
doesn't matter either given the short runs we're talking about.

Oh wow, I never knew that, No honestly, all those years I worked in
computing, networking, datacomms and telecomms never led me to think
for one moment that perhaps adsl is using signals on the pots cable
outside of the pots frequency range (which is actually 300 ~ 3400 Hz).
If you can't detect the sarcasm here, you're ably described by {R}.

What does help is getting the ADSL off the branching network of
stubbed pairs which is your home's voice wiring and onto a single
pair run from the (unfiltered) side of the faceplate filter to
your modem.  Any option which achieves the latter should work
equivalently well.

See, there's that assumption that I have a "branching network of
stubbed pairs".

I don't think it's ever been UK "best practice" to do this, as BT
practice has been serial connection from socket to socket for as long
as I can remember (certainly since before the bt431a style plugs were
introduced). Partly because the GPO method of wiring extensions
required it.

So to clarify, I have:

line --- master / faceplate --- bedroom --- lounge 1 --- lounge 2

bedroom socket has thomson microfilter / splitter and a 2 wire phone.
lounge 1 socket has thomson microfilter / splitter, the modem and a 2
wire phone.

modem is connected at lounge 1.

If I disconnect the internal wiring at the faceplate and run a
separate piece of cw 1301 from the faceplate to a slave socket in the
lounge, and plug the modem straight into that, I get 1 mbit / sec more
than at present. Thus I deduce that using the internal wiring is
costing me at least 1 Mbit / sec. This means that using the internal
wiring really isn't an option.

So we're back to my a or b scenario again.

And that brings me back to:

(1) Which is the best faceplate splitter to use?
(2) Will I benefit from using a "cat 5" rj 11 lead as well (majority
opinion seems to be no, but I think that's you and one other, and
you're of dubious expertise)

Hmm, supplementary to my original questions, can anyone think of a
good reason why I shouldn't run a dc supply for the modem alongside
the cat 5? If I do that, it saves me messing about with mains wiring
(which I feel fully competent and equipped to do, but involves fiddle
and cost) and I can then keep the wall wart by the computers whilst
locating the modem by the master socket.

Denis McMahon
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Best splitter to use
    ... socket area to the network hub, I think I have the following options: ... run the dsl over the new cat 5, leave the modem where it is. ... What you need to do to optimize the ADSL is to carry the ADSL ... RJ11 patch cables and the flat stuff that came with the modem really ...
    (uk.telecom.broadband)
  • Re: adsl problems with windows XP
    ... Did BT test your modem onsite? ... Does the telephone cable from the modem go to the unfiltered socket (rather ... Have you tried removing the filter and using an RJ11 to BT cable to plug ... Have replaces all cables too. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Connecting micro filters
    ... Phone socket is in the hall, PC is in another room leading off the ... reach from the modem) so the phone cable is extended under the floor ... that also has the one of the cables from the ...
    (uk.people.silversurfers)
  • Re: adsl problems with windows XP
    ... If so then take the modem to their place. ... >> Does the telephone cable from the modem go to the unfiltered socket ... >> Have you tried removing the filter and using an RJ11 to BT cable to plug ... Have replaces all cables too. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Noisy Phone line when Broadband modem switched on.
    ... modem line goes to the modem and off to the computer and alaso there is an ... the filter output and listen to the dial tone, ...   If your broadband modem has been installed correctly then it ... should be connected to the ADSL side of such a filter. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)