What equipment for home network backbone (1Gbps)?

[Red Squirrel]

The preferred method is a star topology to a single switch with sufficient ports in each room.
It is preferred to overbuild and avoid multiple switches in a simple network such as yours for one reason.
Having only one switch eliminates a troubleshooting step should you ever have a problem with hardware. Granted, switch failures are not common but not having to figure out which device is poisoning the network is still a better solution.
Sometimes you can't anticipate needs and will have to use a satellite switch later on.
I prefer to do it that way rather than have cascaded switches to start with.

That is true, I like having everything centralized too and that's how I did it in my house. Everything goes to the patch panel. When pulling wire always add about double what you think you will use. If you need 2 jacks now, then put 4.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Currently, the speed bottleneck for me is the cable modem. Its using DOCSIS 3 which my SP capped the speed to 100Mbps. I reckon my Dlink DIR655 router could cope with 1Gbps uplink but not the cable modem.
So far, i have or could not find any modem that could offer 1Gbps speed for home use and if SP provides so. Let's see what we will get in June/July this year when RSPs begin to offer their services.
Should i go for option 1 or option 2 as in post#13?

You seem to think that you need a "modem", in addition to the ONT.

From what I know of Verizon FIOS installs, the ONT has both a coax (for video and MOCA), and a Gbit ethernet CAT5 port. The router (Verizon supplies one) plugs into the ONT, using either connection type. There is no "modem", between the ONT and the router.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Suggestions earlier says to connect 1x port from router to a Gigabit switch in the central location and from there to patch panel and then to rooms. This is shown in post#13 Option1. With this, there is already one hop down from router and i'm not sure if the download speed would be affected or not.

Option2 is worse. There are several switches down from router (the backbone) and i suspect the download speed could be badly hit.

As i don't have the luxury to test Option1 and Option2, i was banking on the knowledge of forumers here. Currently, all my nodes connect directly to the router and i don't have speed problem.

Adding switches behind the router does not materially slow down the bandwidth, it might add an unnoticable amount of latency. I don't think you have to worry about that.

 

[lenkiatleong]

Hi SkyKing, redsquirrel and virtuallarry,

Thanks for your repllies/opinion and sharing your knowledge of having cascading switches configuration.

Actually, i am leaning towards Option2, i.e., multiple switches after learning that cascading switches would not affect the performance of internet bandwidth that i will be subscribing to. Pls see the image below:

Where,
RSP: Retail Service Provider // new FTTH provider
Starhub: My current provider
OpCo: Independent co that provide FTTH infra
FO TP: Fiber Optic termination point
NTE: Provided by OpCo with FO input and multiple ethernet output ports
Residential Gateway: This is the ONT which is still unknown to us how it looks like and what it has.

Dotted line from RG to Coax splitter is what i assume that could happen if RG supports coax.
Dotted line from RG to Core Switch is what i assume if RG has integrated wireless router built in.

After learning that cascading swtiches does not really matter, i prefer to lay only 2x cable to each room, i.e., 1x for spare. With this, i will connect a Gigabit Switch in each room so that i can buy the correct number of ports depending on usage in each rooom. I did not really though that HDTV would come with UTP port to access the internet a few years ago and now HDTV comes with Skype feature!! So, who knows what other equipment in the room that would need internet access and this really amaze me each year.
I really could not plan how many UTP point that i need in each room in the next few years. Therefore, i think its best to buy a Gigabit switch to solve this unknown.
However, you brought on a good point which is to minimise device failure or device that is poisoning the network.

I think this 2 options are good for another round of discussions.

Cheers.

 

[spidey07]

You're making this way more complicated and expensive than it needs to be. Just put cat6 outlets wherever you need them and pull them all into a single switch or two, a star. wiring is simple, can be used for everything, you're not relying on active equipment.

WAY more complicated than it needs to be. Sorry to vent, but this idea is just stupid and has no merit whatsoever only to be overly complicated just for making it complicated sakes.

This is NOT how you do network design.

 

[deimos3428]

Upon reading up a bit I'd agree this is very likely GPON. Nice solution, but anyone expecting wirespeed downloads might be in for a surprise...I'd be interested in hearing what real-world bandwidth customers are getting. OP, what matters at this point is your LAN configuration.

I think this 2 options are good for another round of discussions.

Unless you're made of money it's not cost-effective to have that many gigabit ports standing about doing nothing. Cable is a lot cheaper than multiple gigabit switches -- I'd just run extra cables from the storeroom to each room for expansion purposes and leave them coiled and unterminated. You might want to wire them up all up to wall jacks and test them, but personally I wouldn't bother so I could remove them neatly if it turns out they weren't required.

You only need a single switch in the storeroom and if possible make it the same device as the router -- no need to go overboard on that either. Get gigabit interfaces anywhere you're buying new, but I wouldn't bother upgrading any existing interfaces until you have a feel for your real-world bandwidth.

 

[lenkiatleong]

You're making this way more complicated and expensive than it needs to be. Just put cat6 outlets wherever you need them and pull them all into a single switch or two, a star. wiring is simple, can be used for everything, you're not relying on active equipment.

WAY more complicated than it needs to be. Sorry to vent, but this idea is just stupid and has no merit whatsoever only to be overly complicated just for making it complicated sakes.

This is NOT how you do network design.

For a 3 generations family living under the same roof, the "need" for bandwidth is quite apparent. Each room requires about 6-8 UTP points and i have 6 rooms (Living,room1-4, study) and that would make 36-48 UTP points are needed in the central location with no spares. If i cater for future product, that would make 8-10 points in each rooms and 48-60 points in the central location.
Here, it costs SGD70/point and that would costs SGD3360-4200 just for the cable installation. And to cater for 48-60 points, i most likely need 3x24 ports switches in central location.
Costs of 24 ports Gigabit switch is about SGD400 (estimate) and that would cost me SGD1200.
So, total cost for Option1 is 1200 + 4200 = SGD5400.

Using Option2, i only need 2x UTP points to 6 rooms. This would costs me SGD70X12 = SGD840.
Throw in 7x Gigabit switch (SGD200 each) and that would cost me SGD1400.
So total cost for option2 is 840 + 1400 = SGD2200

Now the unknown to me is, i still cannot get the actual performance statistic for cascading switches compare to one switch. If the performance is negligible, then the price factor kicks in and option2 makes sense to me.

Unless, there are other unknown factors which poses great problems using option2, i think i'll stick to option2.

That's why, i need help from forumers here to offer the good/bad for option1/2.

Any comments/advises/rants are welcome. :biggrin:

 

[robmurphy]

It sounds like you will have a rat's nest in each room. 6 Active terminations in each room is a fair amount. Unless you will be doing large file transfers across the home LAN then you should maybe think of 100 Mbs switches, or switch. 100 Mbs switches are quite cheap these days.

Its highley unlikely you will get a single gigabit download over the internet. You may well be able to have mutiple downloads adding upto 1 Gbs.

For large downloads a central server (WHS or linux) connected to a gigabit port on the RSP supplied router would mean downloads could shared amongst the PCs on the LAN. 100 Mbs is more than enough for watching videos stored on another PC, or the server.

For most switches running 2 cables between them will cause problems. If you are going to use 2 links between the switches then check the switches can deal with that. Almost certainly a basic umanaged switch will not be able to cope with this. I'm not an expert but this sounds like a big problem with broadcasts. A broadcast would be sent from the first switch to the second, on both links. The second switch would then send the broadcast received on the first link back on the second link, and the broadcast received on the second link back on the first. This would keep going on, and on, and on.

I think, as has been already said, this is getting way too complicated. I think you would be better to wait and see exactly what the RSP will provide, and at what speed. 1 project I was working on used fibre to the home, this gave a 10 Mbs ethernet interface to the user. Another fibre based project gave the user a 100 Mbs ethernet interface.

Once you know the full details of the service(s) provides you can then decide what cabling needs installing, and what other equipment will be needed. This thread has already gone from terminations in 2 rooms (original post) to 6 (last post by op).

Rob

 

[deimos3428]

For most switches running 2 cables between them will cause problems.

Excellent point. It's called a bridging loop, but modern switches implement a counter-measure called STP or "spanning tree protocol" to mitigate that problem. The real concern is the use of multiple low-quality switches that may not have advanced features designed for multiple switch networks -- things like STP, VLANs, VTP, Etherchannel bonding, etc. -- as they use a static configuration.

I think, as has been already said, this is getting way too complicated. I think you would be better to wait and see exactly what the RSP will provide, and at what speed. 1 project I was working on used fibre to the home, this gave a 10 Mbs ethernet interface to the user. Another fibre based project gave the user a 100 Mbs ethernet interface.

Absolutely. Also, given the apparent desire for ubiquitous access to the internet in this particular home, the OP needs to take another long hard look at wireless. It will save a ton of cabling and unnecessary switches. Contemplating 48-60 network drops in a single house is just insane, frankly.

 

[seepy83]

Contemplating 48-60 network drops in a single house is just insane, frankly.

It is absolutely insane. Most of this thread is insane. I would love to see the electricity bill for a house that has 48 network devices.

lenkiatleong -
You should heed the advice of people that have done similar work before. Designate a closet or other space in your house as your network closet. Terminate all of your network drops on a patch panel there, and put your switches in the same location. Make sure to account for addequate ventilation/cooling if you do use a closet.

You can run 6-8 network cables to each location, but you don't necessarily need to terminate all of them until you have devices requiring those connections. My guess is you could start out with a 24-port patch panel, and then add another one in the future if needed. Just leave the unused network drops in the wall at its future location, and loosely coiled next to the patch panel (so you can terminate on a second one).

The same goes for your switches...My guess is that you don't currently have 48-60 devices that require a wired ethernet connection. I consider it a longshot to even have 24 in a residential home, but I suppose it's possible. Just buy a 24-port gigabit switch if that will suit your current needs. You can always add a second or third in the future.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

You're making this way more complicated and expensive than it needs to be. Just put cat6 outlets wherever you need them and pull them all into a single switch or two, a star. wiring is simple, can be used for everything, you're not relying on active equipment.

WAY more complicated than it needs to be. Sorry to vent, but this idea is just stupid and has no merit whatsoever only to be overly complicated just for making it complicated sakes.

This is NOT how you do network design.

It is absolutely insane. Most of this thread is insane. I would love to see the electricity bill for a house that has 48 network devices.

lenkiatleong -
You should heed the advice of people that have done similar work before. Designate a closet or other space in your house as your network closet. Terminate all of your network drops on a patch panel there, and put your switches in the same location. Make sure to account for addequate ventilation/cooling if you do use a closet.

You can run 6-8 network cables to each location, but you don't necessarily need to terminate all of them until you have devices requiring those connections. My guess is you could start out with a 24-port patch panel, and then add another one in the future if needed. Just leave the unused network drops in the wall at its future location, and loosely coiled next to the patch panel (so you can terminate on a second one).

The same goes for your switches...My guess is that you don't currently have 48-60 devices that require a wired ethernet connection. I consider it a longshot to even have 24 in a residential home, but I suppose it's possible. Just buy a 24-port gigabit switch if that will suit your current needs. You can always add a second or third in the future.

These x2.

I saw this thread and instantly thought back to my HS days when I thought how "cool" it would be to design these hugely expensive/complex systems to make my house "cool". There was a time when I seriously researched T1 connections to my home, and how I could actually use it. This thread brings me back to those days TBH.

Even with 15 people in a single home, they would be hard pressed to use 45-60 wired ports (unless it's a rich family or something and they have network receivers, TV's, Blu-Ray's, HTPC's, MCE extenders, etc in every room).

Then, the amount you'll pay monthly for 1 gbps link is going to be extremely high (I don't care where you are, because 1 gbps is currently cost-prohibitive). Regardless of that (either if you don't care, have money to burn, or it's not actually expensive), assuming you get 1 gbps to your home it's extremely unlikely you'll use that. You definitely won't from any single source, and even with torrents/multiple simultaneous dl's it's not likely you'll actually hit that.

I don't mean to be an ass, but do you realize how much you can dl with 1 gbps? How many 2 TB hd's do you have to store all this data you're dl'ing (because streaming isn't going to use up all this bandwidth)?

I'm all for wiring to support 1 gbps in the future. That means putting in Cat 6, and wiring 2-4 ports/room (more for some rooms obviously). Then get a gigabit switch to put in your basement/electronics closet/etc, and use a patch panel to connect it all. Trying to design a residential network that can support 1 gbps from the router>end devices isn't needed.

FWIW, at work my department just went from 10 mbps switches to 10/100 mbps switches this past fall, and we saw next to no performance increase from the switch on end PC's. Youtube, Hulu, streaming audio/video and all that worked just fine on 10 mbps switches. Just a thought.

 

[kevnich2]

Even with an actual 1gb internet link - there are no servers on the internet that will give you that speed on downloads. I had a FIOS connection at 20mb and the only servers that could offer BW for that was from downloads from microsoft. For a large house with a lot of internet user's - 50mb would suffice just fine. You could have multiple HD streaming videos with 50mb without a problem. I can't even think of what a residential house would need with even 100mb internet connection at this point. Take everyone else's advise and wait for the connection to be put in and then see what you end up NEEDING. Don't put the carriage before the horse here.

 

[lenkiatleong]

It sounds like you will have a rat's nest in each room. 6 Active terminations in each room is a fair amount. Unless you will be doing large file transfers across the home LAN then you should maybe think of 100 Mbs switches, or switch. 100 Mbs switches are quite cheap these days.

Yes. I'm doing a lot of large file transfer between rooms because i don't like to sit in a fix room to transfer camcorder files to/from NAS (in the living room). Gigabit switch is now a need.

Its highley unlikely you will get a single gigabit download over the internet. You may well be able to have mutiple downloads adding upto 1 Gbs.

For large downloads a central server (WHS or linux) connected to a gigabit port on the RSP supplied router would mean downloads could shared amongst the PCs on the LAN. 100 Mbs is more than enough for watching videos stored on another PC, or the server.

This is unknown still. I reckon that RSP would offer 100Mbps initiallly for broadband and uses the same ONT to offer other services which could add up to 1Gbps bandwidth.

For most switches running 2 cables between them will cause problems. If you are going to use 2 links between the switches then check the switches can deal with that. Almost certainly a basic umanaged switch will not be able to cope with this. I'm not an expert but this sounds like a big problem with broadcasts. A broadcast would be sent from the first switch to the second, on both links. The second switch would then send the broadcast received on the first link back on the second link, and the broadcast received on the second link back on the first. This would keep going on, and on, and on.

No. I'm not using 2 links to a switch. I am saying 2 UTP points in each room where 1 point will be used and the other as spare.

I think, as has been already said, this is getting way too complicated. I think you would be better to wait and see exactly what the RSP will provide, and at what speed. 1 project I was working on used fibre to the home, this gave a 10 Mbs ethernet interface to the user. Another fibre based project gave the user a 100 Mbs ethernet interface.

Once you know the full details of the service(s) provides you can then decide what cabling needs installing, and what other equipment will be needed. This thread has already gone from terminations in 2 rooms (original post) to 6 (last post by op).

Rob

Noted. Thanks.

 

[lenkiatleong]

Absolutely. Also, given the apparent desire for ubiquitous access to the internet in this particular home, the OP needs to take another long hard look at wireless. It will save a ton of cabling and unnecessary switches. Contemplating 48-60 network drops in a single house is just insane, frankly.

In a 3 generations family home, 48-60 points is getting common nowadays. Look at all the products/innovations coming out each day. I have never thought that bluray or HDTV would need Internet access too since CRT and VHS days. I reckon that a few years down the road, more products would need internet access too. Thanks to creative people in US/Europe !!

I don't like wireless because when i close the room door, the HD streaming from my NAS breaks.

 

[lenkiatleong]

It is absolutely insane. Most of this thread is insane. I would love to see the electricity bill for a house that has 48 network devices.

Quite true but not insane. :biggrin: My elec. bill runs from SGD300-400. But this is not the point. Life's short and there are tons of innovation product coming out each day. I can't wait to get my hands on LG or Panasonic HDTV which offers Skype !! :biggrin:

lenkiatleong -
You should heed the advice of people that have done similar work before. Designate a closet or other space in your house as your network closet. Terminate all of your network drops on a patch panel there, and put your switches in the same location. Make sure to account for addequate ventilation/cooling if you do use a closet.

You can run 6-8 network cables to each location, but you don't necessarily need to terminate all of them until you have devices requiring those connections. My guess is you could start out with a 24-port patch panel, and then add another one in the future if needed. Just leave the unused network drops in the wall at its future location, and loosely coiled next to the patch panel (so you can terminate on a second one).

The cable installer will still charge SGD70/point with/without termination. And in apartment, its quite a big job to lay those cable when i have cornices, built in wardrobes and concrete ceilings to deal with. After drilling holes on the wall they have to patch them up and then paint. I need to deal with cable installer, civil work contractor and carpenters. Therefore, i really have to plan properly and leave the backbone cables alone for the next 10-15 years !! I was really tempted to install fiber optic but it costs too much for "future proofing".

The same goes for your switches...My guess is that you don't currently have 48-60 devices that require a wired ethernet connection. I consider it a longshot to even have 24 in a residential home, but I suppose it's possible. Just buy a 24-port gigabit switch if that will suit your current needs. You can always add a second or third in the future.

Yes. Today, its nearing 24 ports. In a year or two, my teenages children would like to have their own entertainment stuffs in their rooms. And when the nephews/nieces come for weekends, they are armed with their notebooks for gaming!! So, 48-60 in 5 years time may not be enough.

 

[lenkiatleong]

These x2.

I saw this thread and instantly thought back to my HS days when I thought how "cool" it would be to design these hugely expensive/complex systems to make my house "cool". There was a time when I seriously researched T1 connections to my home, and how I could actually use it. This thread brings me back to those days TBH.

Its not the "cool" factor. I have passed that age. Its really a need in 2-5 years down the road for me and i don't want to mess with the cables again for the next 10-15 years.

Even with 15 people in a single home, they would be hard pressed to use 45-60 wired ports (unless it's a rich family or something and they have network receivers, TV's, Blu-Ray's, HTPC's, MCE extenders, etc in every room).

Electronic products here are relatively cheap. Its quite common to have several HDTVs, AV receiver, blurays, PCs and those equipment i listed in post#1 in a unit. I blame it totally on those products that comes out each day and they require Internet/network access!! :biggrin:

Then, the amount you'll pay monthly for 1 gbps link is going to be extremely high (I don't care where you are, because 1 gbps is currently cost-prohibitive). Regardless of that (either if you don't care, have money to burn, or it's not actually expensive), assuming you get 1 gbps to your home it's extremely unlikely you'll use that. You definitely won't from any single source, and even with torrents/multiple simultaneous dl's it's not likely you'll actually hit that.

You are right. The government said "up to 1Gbps to every home initially". So, i reckon RSP here would offer 100Mbps for broadband initially which we are now enjoying without FTTH and other services, e.g., HD VOD and etc. We shall see.

I don't mean to be an ass, but do you realize how much you can dl with 1 gbps? How many 2 TB hd's do you have to store all this data you're dl'ing (because streaming isn't going to use up all this bandwidth)?

Agree with you. I reckon that the 1 Gbps to each home is meant for triple plays. Not only downloading or BT.

I'm all for wiring to support 1 gbps in the future. That means putting in Cat 6, and wiring 2-4 ports/room (more for some rooms obviously). Then get a gigabit switch to put in your basement/electronics closet/etc, and use a patch panel to connect it all. Trying to design a residential network that can support 1 gbps from the router>end devices isn't needed.

I need high bandwidth from any room to any room because we stream mts/m2ts files, music from the NAS to any PCs/Notebooks in any room. When my siblings come over, we exchange those files from any location in the unit because we don't know which space is free to be used when all the kids are all over the places. Phew.
I am sick and tired of using homeplug (85Mbps) and wireless N as they restrict me to a single location (wireless) and the speed are low (Homeplug). It may take many hours to transfer those files. Sometimes, they purchase a new products, e.g., Archos 7 or new external HDD and they want all those large files in my NAS too. Phew, another round of hours transferring.

FWIW, at work my department just went from 10 mbps switches to 10/100 mbps switches this past fall, and we saw next to no performance increase from the switch on end PC's. Youtube, Hulu, streaming audio/video and all that worked just fine on 10 mbps switches. Just a thought.

Thanks for this info. But i reckon and hope that the big boys from US would open shops here and offer HD video contents which may require high bandwidth for each STB. Currently, HD content providers offer high PQ but low SQ, i.e., not TrueHD or DTS HD MA codecs. I hope that the day will come soon when these codecs are available over the internet. And these codecs requires about 5Mbps/channel for audio + 24Mbps for Picture. That would be about 5X8 channels = 40Mbps + 24Mbps = 64Mbps for each HD STB.
Then kids nowadays are multitaskers. They are doing so many things on their PC at the same time. So, 1Gbps for home network in 2-5 year time is barely enough. :\

 

[lenkiatleong]

So far, i gather the following for option2, i.e., multi switches design.

Bad points:
- Too many switches and cost more on them
- Consume more electricity
- May have latency issue??
- May have download/upload speed issue??
- More point of failure

Good points:
- Need less UTP points to each room
- Save cable installation cost
- Looks good on the wall with only 2x points.
- Can expand number of ports in each room just by upgrading switch when need arises.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Its not the "cool" factor. I have passed that age. Its really a need in 2-5 years down the road for me and i don't want to mess with the cables again for the next 10-15 years.

Once again, cabling I get and agree with. Install Cat 6 to a patch panel. You don't need a 1 gbps backbone though IMHO.

Agree with you. I reckon that the 1 Gbps to each home is meant for triple plays. Not only downloading or BT.

So, then the only reason you are doing this is solely for file transfers since your online usage is very unlikely to ever eat up even a 100 mbps link.

I need high bandwidth from any room to any room because we stream mts/m2ts files, music from the NAS to any PCs/Notebooks in any room. When my siblings come over, we exchange those files from any location in the unit because we don't know which space is free to be used when all the kids are all over the places. Phew.


I am sick and tired of using homeplug (85Mbps) and wireless N as they restrict me to a single location (wireless) and the speed are low (Homeplug). It may take many hours to transfer those files. Sometimes, they purchase a new products, e.g., Archos 7 or new external HDD and they want all those large files in my NAS too. Phew, another round of hours transferring.

Wireless N would not restrict you to a single location, hence why it's wireless . You might be limited in your range to get the full Wireless N speeds, but it's not just one spot .

So, you do a lot of large file transfers from external drive>host PC>over the network>NAS? Any reason you don't just take the external drive and put it in the NAS? Do all your PC's have gigabit nics? How about your home theater (TV/Blu-Ray/etc)? Are you going to change all that stuff when it gets gigabit just so you can have gigabit? If so, more power to ya


Thanks for this info. But i reckon and hope that the big boys from US would open shops here and offer HD video contents which may require high bandwidth for each STB. Currently, HD content providers offer high PQ but low SQ, i.e., not TrueHD or DTS HD MA codecs. I hope that the day will come soon when these codecs are available over the internet. And these codecs requires about 5Mbps/channel for audio + 24Mbps for Picture. That would be about 5X8 channels = 40Mbps + 24Mbps = 64Mbps for each HD STB.

Where do you see 5 mbps/channel for audio?

Regardless, you are now talking about TV which (in the States at least) isn't done over a TCP/IP network from the provider. Everything is coax (RG6/56 IIRC), and done entirely seperate from any kind of IP based networking. In the future they are planning to move to IPTV, but even then things will be compressed in some form.

I'd be curious to see once all this stuff is setup/deployed in your area and all that, I'd love to see a usage history for an average week taken at your router (or the ISPs).

Then kids nowadays are multitaskers. They are doing so many things on their PC at the same time. So, 1Gbps for home network in 2-5 year time is barely enough. :\

I don't know what they are multitasking with, but there seems to be something wrong if they are actually consuming 1 gbps in bandwidth... That's just IMO of course.

Good luck with this, and let us know how it turns out.

Replied with bolded comments

 

[deimos3428]

In a 3 generations family home, 48-60 points is getting common nowadays.

Just how many people are living in this home? Sorry, but there's no way you need this many drops in a residence, and it's not even close to "common".

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

So far, i gather the following for option2, i.e., multi switches design.

Bad points:
- Too many switches and cost more on them
- Consume more electricity
- May have latency issue??
- May have download/upload speed issue??
- More point of failure

Good points:
- Need less UTP points to each room
- Save cable installation cost
- Looks good on the wall with only 2x points.
- Can expand number of ports in each room just by upgrading switch when need arises.

Personally, I'd rather have more wallplates in each room and all my switches in my equipment closet. Easier to manage and cleaner look. If you absolutely needed more ports in some room for whatever reason you could then add a switch in each room.

FYI, you need to make sure to get switches that support networks with multiple switches in it. If you don't you'll run into issues.

 

[seepy83]

lenkiatleong, I don't know if you have a similar saying in Singapore, but here it is often said that "A fool and his money are soon parted". I suggest you take a good look at exactly what you're trying to accomplish and the reasons behind it.

To me, it sounds like you are trying to build a network infrastructure in your home that you expect to last 10-15 years. Unless you have a crystal ball that can see into the future, and a time machine that can send you the cabling and other materials being used at that point in time, I would wager my retirement fund that your plan will not be successful. Even if you run a bundle of Cat6a, Cat7a, RG6, and Multi-Mode fiber to every location, I doubt that any of those will be the preferred cabling 15 years from now.

Also, your cable installer will charge you SGD70 per drop? If you have 4 cables going to the same location on the wall, I think you could negotiate with him to only charge labor for a single drop and materials for all 4. The installer will just need to tape the 4 cables together and pull it through all at once. Make sure you aren't getting ripped off...

 

[lenkiatleong]

lenkiatleong, I don't know if you have a similar saying in Singapore, but here it is often said that "A fool and his money are soon parted". I suggest you take a good look at exactly what you're trying to accomplish and the reasons behind it.

To me, it sounds like you are trying to build a network infrastructure in your home that you expect to last 10-15 years. Unless you have a crystal ball that can see into the future, and a time machine that can send you the cabling and other materials being used at that point in time, I would wager my retirement fund that your plan will not be successful. Even if you run a bundle of Cat6a, Cat7a, RG6, and Multi-Mode fiber to every location, I doubt that any of those will be the preferred cabling 15 years from now.

Also, your cable installer will charge you SGD70 per drop? If you have 4 cables going to the same location on the wall, I think you could negotiate with him to only charge labor for a single drop and materials for all 4. The installer will just need to tape the 4 cables together and pull it through all at once. Make sure you aren't getting ripped off...

Yes. To last 10-15 years as i don't enjoy going through the installation process. I am betting on this white paper and i really hope that he's right. :biggrin:
http://www.siemon.com/us/white_papers/06-05-18-tco.asp

 

[lenkiatleong]

Replied with bolded comments

Strong backbone network for today is mostly for large file transfer as my 100Mbps internet speed is hardly stress. There are not many content providers in S'pore that offer triple plays.
With FTTH coming this year, i hope the 100Mbps speed would be stretch a bit. Current HD content uses compress method to deliver to our home but if FTTH offer 1Gbps and they open shop here, we are in for a treat.:biggrin:

My current Dlink DNS-323 does not support external HDD and its only 100Mbps. Will need to upgrade it to newer model which comes with 1Gbps so that i don't have to wait that long for large file transfer.
Yes, you are right. My Marantz AV8003, bluray and HDTV do not have 1Gbps. But i am sure in 1-2 years time, AV receiver will start rolling 1Gbps port to stream HD contents from NAS. I know that they don't matter so much now. But the device number that needed a UTP point counts today. For me, when i am set to do something for long term, i will do the best that i could afford today (not much though) even though some deem it as silly.
All my PCs has 1Gbps NIC.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Yes. To last 10-15 years as i don't enjoy going through the installation process. I am betting on this white paper and i really hope that he's right. :biggrin:
http://www.siemon.com/us/white_papers/06-05-18-tco.asp

So, why don't you go with Cat 7 since that paper says it will be supported for 15 years?

If your problem is really the "installation process" why not create a way that you're able to simplify that? How about instead of looking to have somebody come install every x years, you have an installer come in and put in conduit (i.e. a 1/2 inch or 1 inch diameter PVC pipe) that the cable is run through? Then you can run any cable you want, yourself, quickly, and cheaply. Just buy the cable and get somebody to come in and terminate it if you don't feel comfortable with that.

Doing it that way also allows you to use cheaper equipment/cables/gear now, and upgrade later when the faster stuff is cheaper and more mainstream.

 

[lenkiatleong]

Replied with bolded comments

Strong backbone network for today is mostly for large file transfer as my 100Mbps internet speed is hardly stress. There are not many content providers in S'pore that offer triple plays.
With FTTH coming this year, i hope the 100Mbps speed would be stretch a bit. Current HD content uses compress method to deliver to our home but if FTTH offer 1Gbps and they open shop here, we are in for a treat.:biggrin:

My current Dlink DNS-323 does not support external HDD and its only 100Mbps. Will need to upgrade it to newer model which comes with 1Gbps so that i don't have to wait that long for large file transfer.
Yes, you are right. My Marantz AV8003, bluray and HDTV do not have 1Gbps. But i am sure in 1-2 years time, AV receiver will start rolling 1Gbps port to stream HD contents from NAS. I know that they don't matter so much now. But the device number that needed a UTP point counts today. For me, when i am set to do something for long term, i will do the best that i could afford today (not much though) even though some deem it as silly.
All my PCs has 1Gbps NIC.