bb16@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Bostater) (11/15/90)
I'm looking for a manufacturer of ethernet cards that can RELIABLY handle
long drop lines. We have several Western Digital WD8003E cards, some of
which can handle line lengths of 125 feet or so and others that can only
handle 65 feet or so. I've talked to tech support at WD and they admit
that they have a problem with longer distances and are "looking into the
problem" Meanwhile, I'm looking for alternate sources of ethernet cards.
My constraints are:
1) Must handle drop line lengths of 125 feet or more
2) Must support NCSA telnet/ftp (with packet drivers)
3) Must be under $500 (<$300 is preferable so I bypass our purchasing dept.)
4) Must be relatively fast (at least 50 Kbytes/s ftp transfer)
Desirable, but not required
1) 16 bit bus (I don't know if it will be that much faster, but having
having access to IRQ8-15 would be nice)
2) Suport for Novell, PC-NFS, etc. (we aren't using them now, but I can
always dream...)
What I really want is a reliable card 50% to 75% return rate is unacceptible!
Thanks in Advance,
--
Scott Bostater Georgia Tech Research Institute - Radar Systems Analysis
"My soul finds rest in God alone; my salvation comes from Him" -Ps 62.1
uucp: ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,ut-ngp}!gatech!prism!bb16
Internet: bb16@prism.gatech.edujrd@cc.usu.edu (11/18/90)
A few messages back a person exclaimed disappointment at the reliability of popular Ethernet boards (such as WD8003E) handling long drop lines (60-125' were mentioned). I think it's safe to say that the longest line coming off the PC side of the Tee connector should be precisely zero feet. It's not the boards, it's physics and violation of the operating principles thereof. Joe D.
jbreeden@netcom.UUCP (John Breeden) (11/24/90)
In article <17132@hydra.gatech.EDU> bb16@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Bostater) writes: >I'm looking for a manufacturer of ethernet cards that can RELIABLY handle >long drop lines. We have several Western Digital WD8003E cards, some of >which can handle line lengths of 125 feet or so and others that can only >handle 65 feet or so. I've talked to tech support at WD and they admit >that they have a problem with longer distances and are "looking into the >problem" Meanwhile, I'm looking for alternate sources of ethernet cards. > If you mean by "drop-line", running 65-125' of thinnet from a tee connector from another thinnet - you're in violation of the 802.3 10base2 spec. You can't run thinnet "drops" off of a thick/thinnet and expect reliability (or even your net to work). -- John Robert Breeden, netcom!jbreeden@apple.com, apple!netcom!jbreeden, ATTMAIL:!jbreeden ------------------------------------------------------------------- "The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from. If you don't like any of them, you just wait for next year's model."
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (11/27/90)
In article <17358@netcom.UUCP> jbreeden@netcom.UUCP (John Breeden) writes: |In article <17132@hydra.gatech.EDU> bb16@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Bostater) writes: |>I'm looking for a manufacturer of Ethernet cards that can RELIABLY handle |>long drop lines. We have several Western Digital WD8003E cards, some of |>which can handle line lengths of 125 feet or so and others that can only |>handle 65 feet or so. I've talked to tech support at WD and they admit |>that they have a problem with longer distances and are "looking into the |>problem" | |If you mean by "drop-line", running 65-125' of thinnet from a tee connector |from another thinnet - you're in violation of the 802.3 10base2 spec. Why does everyone assume this guy is a bozo who's running cable off a thinnet T? I figured he was talking about AUI cables. Wouldn't WD have told him about his error if he was running cables off a thinnet T, instead of admitting _they_ had a problem? The AUI spec is 50 meters so 125 feet should be legal if he is talking about AUI cables. -- Compost: it's the right thing to do.
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (11/27/90)
In article <17358@netcom.UUCP> jbreeden@netcom.UUCP (John Breeden) writes: >In article <17132@hydra.gatech.EDU> bb16@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Bostater) writes: >>I'm looking for a manufacturer of ethernet cards that can RELIABLY handle >>long drop lines. We have several Western Digital WD8003E cards, some of >>which can handle line lengths of 125 feet or so and others that can only >>handle 65 feet or so. I've talked to tech support at WD and they admit >>that they have a problem with longer distances and are "looking into the >>problem" Meanwhile, I'm looking for alternate sources of ethernet cards. >> > >If you mean by "drop-line", running 65-125' of thinnet from a tee connector >from another thinnet - you're in violation of the 802.3 10base2 spec. > >You can't run thinnet "drops" off of a thick/thinnet and expect reliability >(or even your net to work). I imagine he is referring to a thick transceiver cable drop. These are limited to 50m (> 150') in the spec. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
bb16@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Bostater) (11/27/90)
In article <1990Nov26.180842.9530@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: |>In article <17358@netcom.UUCP> jbreeden@netcom.UUCP (John Breeden) writes: |>| |>|If you mean by "drop-line", running 65-125' of thinnet from a tee connector |>|from another thinnet - you're in violation of the 802.3 10base2 spec. |> |>Why does everyone assume this guy is a bozo who's running |>cable off a thinnet T? I figured he was talking about AUI |>cables. Wouldn't WD have told him about his error if he |>was running cables off a thinnet T, instead of admitting |>_they_ had a problem? Yes, I (the original poster) forgot to mention that they are THICK ethernet cables. |> |>The AUI spec is 50 meters so 125 feet should be legal if |>he is talking about AUI cables. WD claimed 300 meters, maybe they should read the spec :-) In all fairness I should read it as well. Now, before the debate on my bozo rating gets geared up... Does anybody know of an ethernet card that handles THICK ethernet lines of 125 feet or more? Thanks in Advance, -- Scott Bostater Georgia Tech Research Institute - Radar Systems Analysis "My soul finds rest in God alone; my salvation comes from Him" -Ps 62.1 uucp: ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,ut-ngp}!gatech!prism!bb16 Internet: bb16@prism.gatech.edu
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (11/27/90)
In article <17572@hydra.gatech.EDU> bb16@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Bostater) writes: ||>The AUI spec is 50 meters so 125 feet should be legal if ||>he is talking about AUI cables. | |WD claimed 300 meters, maybe they should read the spec :-) In all fairness I |should read it as well. Now I'm confused. I don't understand what this 300 meters would be. 10BASE5 allows a 500 meter segment. (the thick yellow stuff) |Does anybody know of an ethernet card that handles THICK ethernet lines of |125 feet or more? Well, as I said, the spec for AUI cables is 50 meters and I can't say I've ever run into a problem with this particular limitation. In fact, I am using a WD8003 (E? I don't know) and have never had any trouble with it, although I don't know exactly how long my AUI cables have been. By the way, the 50 meters is for regulation AUI cable, there are "office rated" AUI cables which are thinner, more flexible, and much higher loss. I think they have a distance multiplier of about 4. Are your AUI cables more flexible than normal? That might be related to your problem. We also use, although none of this should be construed as a recommendation, 3Com cards, and don't have any particular problem with AUI cable length on them either. Another possible option is to bring the thick yellow stuff closer to your nodes. -- Compost: it's the right thing to do.
willis@photon.tamu.EDU (Willis Marti) (11/28/90)
Does anybody know of an ethernet card that handles THICK ethernet lines of 125 feet or more? ...was the original question. In fact, *all* cards should handle 50 meters ~= 162 feet, or they don't meet the spec. But before you beat up WD, which type of transceiver cables are you using (mfg & model) and what kind of transceiver (ditto) are you using? Those can also be the culprits.
dave@interlan.Interlan.COM (Dave Goldblatt) (11/28/90)
In article <10421@helios.TAMU.EDU> willis@photon.tamu.EDU (Willis Marti) writes:
Does anybody know of an ethernet card that handles THICK ethernet lines of
125 feet or more?
...was the original question. In fact, *all* cards should handle
50 meters ~= 162 feet, or they don't meet the spec. But before you beat
up WD, which type of transceiver cables are you using (mfg & model) and
what kind of transceiver (ditto) are you using? Those can also be the
culprits.
The maximum unrepeatered 10BASE5 segment (again, the yellow stuff) is 500m
(1640.42 ft), and the maximum AUI is 50m (164.04 ft). That's the
spec. It is certainly possible the tranceivers are not up to spec,
and are causing the problems; although the original poster did not
mention whose tranceiver he was using, he did state that WD "knew of
the problem", and thus it seems likely to be on their end.
As an aside, our stuff is all tested at the spec (these BIG spools
lurk in the darkened corners of the lab waiting for you to trip over
them...), and passes without problems. (not a plug, mind you; I don't
do sales)
-dg-
--
"You can twist perceptions * Dave Goldblatt dave@interlan.com
Reality won't budge..." * Diagnostic Engineering
- Rush * Racal InterLan
* Boxborough MA (508) 263-9929poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (11/28/90)
In article <1990Nov27.072930.1813@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <17572@hydra.gatech.EDU> bb16@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Bostater) writes: >||>The AUI spec is 50 meters so 125 feet should be legal if >||>he is talking about AUI cables. >| >|WD claimed 300 meters, maybe they should read the spec :-) In all fairness I >|should read it as well. > >Now I'm confused. I don't understand what this 300 meters would be. >10BASE5 allows a 500 meter segment. (the thick yellow stuff) > He may be referring to the maximum length of a thin wire segment. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (11/28/90)
In article <1990Nov26.180842.9530@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: | The AUI spec is 50 meters so 125 feet should be legal if | he is talking about AUI cables. And in answer to another question earlier this week, my net guru told me that ethernet and 802.3 are not only diferent at the packey level, but also in some of the physical specs. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
curci@vsserv.scri.fsu.edu (Raymond Curci) (11/29/90)
>>||>The AUI spec is 50 meters so 125 feet should be legal if >>||>he is talking about AUI cables. >>| >>|WD claimed 300 meters, maybe they should read the spec :-) In all fairness I >>|should read it as well. >> >>Now I'm confused. I don't understand what this 300 meters would be. >>10BASE5 allows a 500 meter segment. (the thick yellow stuff) Maybe I can shed some light on the subject: 500m maximum thick ethernet cable length 185m maximum thin ethernet cable length 300m maximum thin ethernet cable length on a WD8003E-only network with WD8003E jumpered for this special mode 50m maximum tranceiver/AUI cable length Raymond Curci -- Raymond Curci INTERNET: curci@mailer.scri.fsu.edu Systems Engineer UUCP: ...!uunet!mailer.scri.fsu.edu!curci Institute of Molecular Biophysics SPAN: 46453::curci -or- SCRI1::curci Florida State University BITNET: curci@fsu.bitnet
bill@polygen.uucp (Bill Poitras) (12/01/90)
In article <1482@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> curci@vsserv.scri.fsu.edu (Raymond Curci) writes: >Maybe I can shed some light on the subject: > >500m maximum thick ethernet cable length Speaking of light; I heard that fiber optics, which is the ultimate "thin" net, thin is just to describe the width of the wires, having a maximum length of 2400m. Also the maximum transfer rate, given the proper communications hardware is 100 Megabit througput. +-----------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Bill Poitras | Polygen Corporation | {princeton mit-eddie | | (bill) | Waltham, MA USA | bu sunne}!polygen!bill | | | | bill@polygen.com | +-----------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+