Distance from filtered NTE5 socket to ADSL modem

I may have to relocate my ADSL modem/router. I see lots of posts
highlighting the need to place the ADSL modem/router as close as
possible to the BT master socket but I see nothing about actual
distances and the corresponding loss of performance.

Currently getting about 4.9 Mb/s and the distance between the filtered
NTE5 and the modem/router is about 4.5 metres.

I have a choice of putting it 1 meter away and then running a cable
from there to my network switch that is located in the patch panel OR
I move the ADSL modem/router into the patch panel cabinet alongside
the network switch. The cabinet is 8 meters away from the NTE5.

What would you recommend?

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Vet Tech <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I may have to relocate my ADSL modem/router. I see lots of posts
> highlighting the need to place the ADSL modem/router as close as
> possible to the BT master socket but I see nothing about actual
> distances and the corresponding loss of performance.
>
> Currently getting about 4.9 Mb/s and the distance between the filtered
> NTE5 and the modem/router is about 4.5 metres.
>
> I have a choice of putting it 1 meter away and then running a cable
> from there to my network switch that is located in the patch panel OR
> I move the ADSL modem/router into the patch panel cabinet alongside
> the network switch. The cabinet is 8 meters away from the NTE5.
>
> What would you recommend?

It really doesn't matter - as long as you use a good quality dedicated
twisted-pair cable between NTE5 and router. Don't forget that the signal has
probably travelled several Km from the exchange to get to your NTE5 - so a
few more metres ain't going to matter.
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Roger Mills" wrote:

>
> It really doesn't matter - as long as you use a good quality dedicated
> twisted-pair cable between NTE5 and router. Don't forget that the signal has
> probably travelled several Km from the exchange to get to your NTE5 - so a
> few more metres ain't going to matter.

Providing that few meters extra is kept clean and well separated from
sources of household intereference. The cable from the exchange hasn't
normally been near home noise sources such as flourescents, CH
thermostats, motor starters, etc. The fact that the cable has run
several kilometers does not mean you can ignore basic principles just
because it just "a few more meters". It really does matter... Remember
the ADSL signal level is much lower at your end so any noise picked up
there will have more effect than at the BT end.

--
John W
I you really want to mail me, replace the obvious with co.uk twice

"Vet Tech" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:7d5eb2ac-f437-4685-a864-(E-Mail Removed)...
>I may have to relocate my ADSL modem/router. I see lots of posts
> highlighting the need to place the ADSL modem/router as close
> as
> possible to the BT master socket but I see nothing about actual
> distances and the corresponding loss of performance.
>
> Currently getting about 4.9 Mb/s and the distance between the
> filtered
> NTE5 and the modem/router is about 4.5 metres.
>
> I have a choice of putting it 1 meter away and then running a
> cable
> from there to my network switch that is located in the patch
> panel OR
> I move the ADSL modem/router into the patch panel cabinet
> alongside
> the network switch. The cabinet is 8 meters away from the NTE5.
>
> What would you recommend?
>


If it is convenient put the router near the NTE5 and run CAT5 -
best solution.

If it is not convenient then use some screened CAT5 and run the
telephone line on one pair of the same colour. Earth the cable
screen at one end only and all should work well.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 19:44:32 +0100, "Woody"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"Vet Tech" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:7d5eb2ac-f437-4685-a864-(E-Mail Removed)...
>>I may have to relocate my ADSL modem/router. I see lots of posts
>> highlighting the need to place the ADSL modem/router as close
>> as
>> possible to the BT master socket but I see nothing about actual
>> distances and the corresponding loss of performance.
>>
>> Currently getting about 4.9 Mb/s and the distance between the
>> filtered
>> NTE5 and the modem/router is about 4.5 metres.
>>
>> I have a choice of putting it 1 meter away and then running a
>> cable
>> from there to my network switch that is located in the patch
>> panel OR
>> I move the ADSL modem/router into the patch panel cabinet
>> alongside
>> the network switch. The cabinet is 8 meters away from the NTE5.
>>
>> What would you recommend?
>>
>
>
>If it is convenient put the router near the NTE5 and run CAT5 -
>best solution.
>
>If it is not convenient then use some screened CAT5 and run the
>telephone line on one pair of the same colour. Earth the cable
>screen at one end only and all should work well.

I was told not to bother with the ethernet cable and use a wireless
connection on the basis that the wireless connection was so much
faster than the Internet that it would have no effect on connection
speed. Is this sound logic?

On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 18:26:50 GMT, "Ato_Zee" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>
>> Don't forget that the signal has
>> probably travelled several Km from the exchange to get to your NTE5 - so a
>> few more metres ain't going to matter.
>
>That's what I thought, but houses have commutator motors in
>vacuum cleaners, washing machines, electric drills, microwaves that
>click on and off in their reduced power mode, energy saving lamps
>with two power transistors switching to regulate the discharge,
>etc, etc, etc.
>Put your weak signal ADSL cable anywhere near the house mains
>wiring, and there is a risk of noise bursts, even with twisted pair.
>A burst of noise can knock your speed back for several days,
>or permanently if the noise continues.
>Most domestic premises have only one cable route between
>floors, making it difficult to keep the ADSL cable well apart
>from the mains cable.
>So the few more metres can matter a lot.
>Ethernet over CAT5 less of a problem, higher signal
>level, balanced, with error correction.

that might be why earlier in the thread "twisted pair" cable for the
extension lead was mentioned.

The balanced cable can make for a couple of orders of magnitude of
noise rejection compared to normal flat telephone leads.

--
Regards

(E-Mail Removed) - replace xyz with ntl

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 20:24:29 +0100, Scott
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 19:44:32 +0100, "Woody"
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>"Vet Tech" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:7d5eb2ac-f437-4685-a864-(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>I may have to relocate my ADSL modem/router. I see lots of posts
>>> highlighting the need to place the ADSL modem/router as close
>>> as
>>> possible to the BT master socket but I see nothing about actual
>>> distances and the corresponding loss of performance.
>>>
>>> Currently getting about 4.9 Mb/s and the distance between the
>>> filtered
>>> NTE5 and the modem/router is about 4.5 metres.
>>>
>>> I have a choice of putting it 1 meter away and then running a
>>> cable
>>> from there to my network switch that is located in the patch
>>> panel OR
>>> I move the ADSL modem/router into the patch panel cabinet
>>> alongside
>>> the network switch. The cabinet is 8 meters away from the NTE5.
>>>
>>> What would you recommend?
>>>
>>
>>
>>If it is convenient put the router near the NTE5 and run CAT5 -
>>best solution.
>>
>>If it is not convenient then use some screened CAT5 and run the
>>telephone line on one pair of the same colour. Earth the cable
>>screen at one end only and all should work well.
>
>I was told not to bother with the ethernet cable and use a wireless
>connection on the basis that the wireless connection was so much
>faster than the Internet that it would have no effect on connection
>speed. Is this sound logic?

Depends on your Internet feed and the wireless conditions, how many
devices and whether you have local traffic.

If you have 802.11g then the raw bit rate on the air is 54 Mbps "best
case" and the various go faster schemes can do better at the cost of
clogging up the other channels - but 50% of the raw thruput vanishes
in overhead, and very few people get best case in practice.

i get around 20 Mbps real wireless thoughput at home on a couple of
Toshiba laptops, which is plenty for browsing, a bit of streaming and
so on. Move the laptop to the garden to work and 3 to 4 Mbps........

But the wireless channel is shared so is total per access point not
per PC - put 4 wireless devices on it and the aggregate thruput drops
off more, and each device only gets a share of that.

If you have other "stuff" such as streamers or you share files between
machines, then wireless can be a big bottleneck.

--
Regards

(E-Mail Removed) - replace xyz with ntl

Ato_Zee wrote:
> On 2-Jun-2009, Stephen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> that might be why earlier in the thread "twisted pair" cable for the
>> extension lead was mentioned.
>>
>> The balanced cable can make for a couple of orders of magnitude of
>> noise rejection compared to normal flat telephone leads.
>
> Bear in mind that telephone circuits have one leg at exchange
> ground potential, so twisting is twisting the grounded leg with
> the signal leg. Not the best sceneario but better than
> flat untwisted extension cable.
>
> Twisting work best when the circuit is balanced as with
> CAT5 Ethernet.

Huh? at RF - which is what ADSL is - the concept of a 'ground' ceases to
exist after a few feet.

"The Natural Philosopher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:h05n2q$hiu$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Ato_Zee wrote:
>> On 2-Jun-2009, Stephen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> that might be why earlier in the thread "twisted pair" cable
>>> for the
>>> extension lead was mentioned.
>>>
>>> The balanced cable can make for a couple of orders of
>>> magnitude of
>>> noise rejection compared to normal flat telephone leads.
>>
>> Bear in mind that telephone circuits have one leg at exchange
>> ground potential, so twisting is twisting the grounded leg
>> with
>> the signal leg. Not the best sceneario but better than
>> flat untwisted extension cable.
>>
>> Twisting work best when the circuit is balanced as with
>> CAT5 Ethernet.
>
> Huh? at RF - which is what ADSL is - the concept of a 'ground'
> ceases to exist after a few feet.
>
>


Not only that, but neither leg of the line is at 'ground
potential.'

The output from the exchange is from a transformer with an
earthed centre tap. Thus both legs are the same potential above
ground and anything induced will be in both legs and so cancel
out - this is the basis of a balanced line.

If the line feeds a phone then it makes no difference as the
phone is effectively floating (there is no earth connection) but
if it terminates in a PABX or PBX then it will face another
transformer with a centre tap earth.

The reason ADSL doesn't work well along extensions after the
presentation is largely due to the high capacitive coupling in
such cables. It would surprise most people how much the audio
quality of a line is affected - most in HF response - by the use
of 20m of burglar alarm cable (stranded, flexible, not twisted)
instead of proper solid copper twisted pair telephone cable. I
know a couple of people who moved into new houses and complained
of poor audio on the upstairs/kitchen extensions when it was OK
on the phone plugged into the master socket. The extension
cabling had been fitted by the builder (as in Co, not person) and
they had used alarm cable. Fortunately in both cases the wiring
was inside plastic trunk in the walls so it was not too difficult
to replace.



--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Yet another option would be modem next to NTE5 and ethernet over mains
to where the computers are. I did this at a friends house whose NTE5,
for some strange reason, was in the garage!

--
Regards
Dave Saville

NB Remove nospam. for good email address