Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.posted.gcicommunications!news.posted.gcicommunications.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:28:17 -0500 Newsgroups: alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.os.linux.networking Subject: Re: How to set up a spare Linksys WRT54Gv2 as a wired access point network extender References: <87wqg1m37t.fld@apaflo.com> <1ihvh9p3mvq5bobp4584cqukk8h7q1qfms@4ax.com> <87siqnnb2u.fld@apaflo.com> <87bnxamfoe.fld@apaflo.com> <8761nhl7v8.fld@apaflo.com> <87r465j721.fld@apaflo.com> <12egoeyciezgx$.dlg@example1357.net> From: floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) Organization: __________ Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 12:28:14 -0800 Message-ID: <87iorfi4v5.fld@apaflo.com> User-Agent: gnus 5.10.6/XEmacs 21.4.15/Linux 2.6.19 Cancel-Lock: sha1:zstXlA9bIyGBc2+87mK9xKRYJDY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 43 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.237.124.187 X-Trace: sv3-heDpw4cfoZphW5FZ3zKSAGvGw28syIq0NWDfQc10wiI6e/m/crJBU5TbsThlIvf+VW4dqyATHvamJOQ!+WiIvbDtVMeKfKuxZcGWPElCCwRoZH0MkQ1ognflEZmm3s5gB4KxSIcL2LU1R/MoQkCIbNbw X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 3320 Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.networking:2851 DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote: >On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 10:45:27 +0000, mechanic Gave >us: > >>On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 22:02:25 -0700, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno >>wrote: >> >>> There was discussion about crosstalk at the terminations, where >>> crosstalk occurs. What makes you think it would occur in the twisted >>> segment? >> >>Morning DLUNU, thanks to your minders for letting you out to play >>again today. >> > > Is there any post you make where you are not spouting elementary >school mentality horseshit? > >>Now if you were concerned about different twist rates for different >>pairs in a cable, the crosstalk you're worried about must occur in >>the 'twisted segment', no? If it occurred only at the terminations >>the twist rates of the various pairs could be the same with no >>penalty? See the argument? > > You really are lost, child. Even after the other person explained a >few things to you. His logic in that statement is astute and impeccable. >>In telephone cables there were rules set out ages ago to try to >>minimise crosstalk by choosing pairs in appropriate groups in big >>transmission cables, I was just wondering if it was a real problem >>in Ethernet cables or even Ethernet patch cords? Seems unlikely but >>I wondered if there were any standards on this. > > We don't call it "tip and ring". Go back under your rock, loser >muckanic. But we do in fact call it tip and ring. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com