Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.dcom.cabling > #125

Re: Shielded RJ-45: Internal vs External Ground?

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

X-posting to Cabling newsgroups

"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message 
news:vmc2bapjnpb31q1isbqak03mijt93o5k27@4ax.com...
> Per Char Jackson:
>>>I have seen the light and am going to replace the regular Cat5 cables on
>>>my radio links with shielded - using Ubiquiti's ToughCable Pro.
>>
>>I'm curious, where is this discussion taking place where they're
>>recommending shielded cable? I wonder what's the basis for the
>>recommendation. Yes, I'm skeptical.
>
> So was I.
>
> But the manual says that shielded cable is important. viz Page 4 of
> http://setuprouter.com/router/ubiquiti/nanostation-m5/manual-877.pdf
>
> Self-serving promo for their house brand?  That was my kneejerk
> reaction.... but now I know that there are several threads in the
> Ubiquiti fora that make it pretty clear that electrostatic discharge is
> a consideration.  For example: http://tinyurl.com/m5vttf3
>
> Now I realize that I cannot afford to be skeptical because I just don't
> know enough.
>
> The facts are:
>
> - Every so often 3 cams become unreachable from a remote site over
>  a radio link.
>
> - A fourth cam never, ever has any problems
>
> - The 3 problem cams immediately become reachable once both
>  ends of the radio link are re-booted.
>
> - One of the links is attached to the top of a 15-foot windsurfer
>  mast only about 50' from a large bay - i.e. it gets some
>  serious weather.
>
> Add to the above that it is starting to look like there is a correlation
> between the failures and high winds at the site and you see where I
> am....
>
> But, like I said, I'm clueless except that I know that those three
> things are clearly happening....  And the pros on the Ubiquiti site are
> telling me that grounded/shielded cable to an outside radio is
> absolutely standard practice.
>
> I have withdrawn from the discussion where this is taking place because
> I was starting to irritate at least one of the gurus there with my
> incessant beginner-type questions.   The guys who matter there  are
> mostly professionals and it is now clear to me that I was abusing the
> environment.   There are also amateurs there, but I seem to be more
> verbose and less inclined to research before asking than most.
>
> But my basic question remains: how can a radio-link problem be
> camera-specific?
>
> Greater Minds Than Mine have said "No problem... see it all the time."
>
> But I have yet to get specifics... to that end, I just pulled the
> trigger on a smart switch that I will swap in down at the problem site
> when I get down that way.   Then I will be able to test the obvious
> suggestion that it is something to do with bandwidth (not!...but I need
> to prove it) and also to put WireShark on both ends of the link.
>
> Whatever happens, I am going to come out of this knowing significantly
> more than when I went in.
>
> The thread is at: http://tinyurl.com/m6pyfje
> -- 
> Pete Cresswell 

Back to comp.dcom.cabling | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: Shielded RJ-45: Internal vs External Ground? "ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com> - 2015-01-13 12:33 -0600

csiph-web