<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Getting wired	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/</link>
	<description>A House By The Park is a first-hand chronology of the design, planning, and construction of a modern home in Seattle.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:20:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=5.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Tim		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8114</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:20:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8114</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Actually Cat 5e will also support gigabit transfer speeds.  I think your 350Mb/sec info may actually be 350Mhz the cable was tested to run at.  In fact though the ANSI spec for Cat 5e was only specced at 100Mhz and all these cable manufacturers decided to test them at higher frequencies in hope for more money based on consumers liking higher numbers.  Cat 6 is still probably a better choice for you since it is more robust in preventing crosstalk.  And based on your pic having a big bunch of wires close like that will definitely benefit from Cat 6.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually Cat 5e will also support gigabit transfer speeds.  I think your 350Mb/sec info may actually be 350Mhz the cable was tested to run at.  In fact though the ANSI spec for Cat 5e was only specced at 100Mhz and all these cable manufacturers decided to test them at higher frequencies in hope for more money based on consumers liking higher numbers.  Cat 6 is still probably a better choice for you since it is more robust in preventing crosstalk.  And based on your pic having a big bunch of wires close like that will definitely benefit from Cat 6.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mike D.		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8107</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike D.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:33:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8107</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[1BadBoy: I suppose I could have, but two cat 6s are probably overkill. The only way cat6 will ever even matter is if gigabit transfer speeds become not only widespread but essential... and even if they do, I have at least one in each room. You can carry it out even further and say eventually cat6 will be outdated too, but you can only be so futureproof before the cost outweighs the benefit.  As for locations, I did all bedrooms, the kitchen, all offices (sometimes with two separate plates), the roof, the media room, the living room, the master bathroom, and all rooms in the basement.  On a scale of 1-10, 5 being &quot;baseline wired&quot; and 10 being &quot;total overkill&quot; I&#039;m probably an 8.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1BadBoy: I suppose I could have, but two cat 6s are probably overkill. The only way cat6 will ever even matter is if gigabit transfer speeds become not only widespread but essential&#8230; and even if they do, I have at least one in each room. You can carry it out even further and say eventually cat6 will be outdated too, but you can only be so futureproof before the cost outweighs the benefit.  As for locations, I did all bedrooms, the kitchen, all offices (sometimes with two separate plates), the roof, the media room, the living room, the master bathroom, and all rooms in the basement.  On a scale of 1-10, 5 being &#8220;baseline wired&#8221; and 10 being &#8220;total overkill&#8221; I&#8217;m probably an 8.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: 1BadBoy		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8106</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[1BadBoy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:11:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8106</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This may be something you hadn&#039;t considered (and maybe too late anyway), but as I understand it you can run the CAT6 cable to every location, but terminate with the less expensive CAT5e equipment (or CAT6 if you need it now). This allows the most future expandability if you needed it.

Mike, can you indicate to which locations you ran the CATX cabling? I know 1 each (CAT5e and CAT6) to each bedroom, but what about other type rooms. Example, did you run any to the kitchen, laundry, bathroom :-), garage, etc. Just thinking about planning for locations in our new home.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This may be something you hadn&#8217;t considered (and maybe too late anyway), but as I understand it you can run the CAT6 cable to every location, but terminate with the less expensive CAT5e equipment (or CAT6 if you need it now). This allows the most future expandability if you needed it.</p>
<p>Mike, can you indicate to which locations you ran the CATX cabling? I know 1 each (CAT5e and CAT6) to each bedroom, but what about other type rooms. Example, did you run any to the kitchen, laundry, bathroom :-), garage, etc. Just thinking about planning for locations in our new home.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Josh Williams		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8105</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Josh Williams]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:48:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8105</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Okay, let&#039;s make a deal... I&#039;ll let you visit my 5-Star Green Modern here in Austin, if you&#039;ll return the favor next time I&#039;m in Seattle.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, let&#8217;s make a deal&#8230; I&#8217;ll let you visit my 5-Star Green Modern here in Austin, if you&#8217;ll return the favor next time I&#8217;m in Seattle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Karl Katzke		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8103</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karl Katzke]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:40:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8103</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[About the only thing cat6 is easier on is your pocketbook. And the installer&#039;s hands. Punching down cat6 isn&#039;t hard, but crimping cat6 sucks pretty bad.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About the only thing cat6 is easier on is your pocketbook. And the installer&#8217;s hands. Punching down cat6 isn&#8217;t hard, but crimping cat6 sucks pretty bad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mike D.		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8102</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike D.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:35:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8102</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Interesting.  Well, I guess I have all bases covered anyway with one cat5e and one cat6 to each room. There are a bunch of other cat5e wires running to other things like the Russound controllers and the motorized shades, but those will always be low bandwidth.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting.  Well, I guess I have all bases covered anyway with one cat5e and one cat6 to each room. There are a bunch of other cat5e wires running to other things like the Russound controllers and the motorized shades, but those will always be low bandwidth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Karl Katzke		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8101</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karl Katzke]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:25:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8101</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Nope. You&#039;d be running two different wires at two different voltages. Voice over IP would be a more reliable way of sticking to one wire. 

Cat5e can&#039;t be switched out as you talk about without a modulator box in between. Cat6 and cat5e have no difference in that respect, although you get throttled down to the 350m/s or below on the cat6 line no matter what when you&#039;ve got the modulator box on the other end. 

It&#039;s really better to go VOIP and all cat6 if you were to do it over again... we&#039;re using wireless voip handsets at work with asterisk and it works beautifully even in an &quot;industrial&quot; setting with &quot;commercial&quot; hardware.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nope. You&#8217;d be running two different wires at two different voltages. Voice over IP would be a more reliable way of sticking to one wire. </p>
<p>Cat5e can&#8217;t be switched out as you talk about without a modulator box in between. Cat6 and cat5e have no difference in that respect, although you get throttled down to the 350m/s or below on the cat6 line no matter what when you&#8217;ve got the modulator box on the other end. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s really better to go VOIP and all cat6 if you were to do it over again&#8230; we&#8217;re using wireless voip handsets at work with asterisk and it works beautifully even in an &#8220;industrial&#8221; setting with &#8220;commercial&#8221; hardware.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mike D.		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8100</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike D.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:15:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8100</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks.  I think that&#039;s what I meant but I probably didn&#039;t say it right.  So essentially, you can use cat6, but if you do, you couldn&#039;t randomly switch between a data cable and a phone cable theoretically throughout the day?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks.  I think that&#8217;s what I meant but I probably didn&#8217;t say it right.  So essentially, you can use cat6, but if you do, you couldn&#8217;t randomly switch between a data cable and a phone cable theoretically throughout the day?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Karl Katzke		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8099</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karl Katzke]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:08:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8099</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Mike, the only issue with terminating Cat6 with a phone jack is when you&#039;re talking jumper cables -- the cables that run between a phone handset and the wall -- because the phone jack can&#039;t take the, ahem, girth of the cat6 along with the shielding. That isn&#039;t an issue inside the walls, because you terminate the cat6 inside a modular punchdown jack on one end and in a modular punchdown (likely a patch or bridge panel) on the other.

There&#039;s absolutely no reason you can&#039;t use Cat6 inside the walls for voice.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike, the only issue with terminating Cat6 with a phone jack is when you&#8217;re talking jumper cables &#8212; the cables that run between a phone handset and the wall &#8212; because the phone jack can&#8217;t take the, ahem, girth of the cat6 along with the shielding. That isn&#8217;t an issue inside the walls, because you terminate the cat6 inside a modular punchdown jack on one end and in a modular punchdown (likely a patch or bridge panel) on the other.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s absolutely no reason you can&#8217;t use Cat6 inside the walls for voice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mike D.		</title>
		<link>https://ahousebythepark.com/journal/archive/2009/11/04/getting-wired/comment-page-1/#comment-8098</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike D.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:04:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ahousebythepark.com/journal/?p=543#comment-8098</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Karl: Good question. I wouldn&#039;t even bet a dollar on this, but I *think* it&#039;s because of the way the wires are terminated.  To be more precise, you probably *can* use cat 6 cabling for the phone but it wouldn&#039;t terminate the same way a data line would.  I believe with cat5e, the wires are already set up in a way that works for both phone and data.  If anyone knows if this is right or wrong, please let me know and I&#039;ll update the post.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Karl: Good question. I wouldn&#8217;t even bet a dollar on this, but I *think* it&#8217;s because of the way the wires are terminated.  To be more precise, you probably *can* use cat 6 cabling for the phone but it wouldn&#8217;t terminate the same way a data line would.  I believe with cat5e, the wires are already set up in a way that works for both phone and data.  If anyone knows if this is right or wrong, please let me know and I&#8217;ll update the post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
