Phone extension cables

I have a Belkin wireless adsl router mounted on a roof approx 70meters from
my incoming phone point.
Well, I have a lot of trouble getting the router to login to BT, so just to
test it I connected it directly to my Phone socket and it works perfectly.
So my question is :- As I am using normal phone extension plug and sockets
from my local hardware shop, are these the correct cables to use?

Tony J

"Tony" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
....
>So my question is :- As I am using normal phone extension plug and sockets
>from my local hardware shop, are these the correct cables to use?

Generally the plugs and sockets make no difference.

What counts is the cable. I would highly suggest that you just
run CAT5 cable.

In fact though, any quality UTP (unshielded twisted pair)
telephone or data cable will be fine. Just make sure that it is
*twisted* *pair*! Any of the "flat satin" type cables, and some
that has four wires (red, green, yellow and black) and looks
just like other cable with the same colors that is twisted pair,
are *not* suitable for anything longer than maybe 10-12 feet.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)

Ahh great thanks
Yes the extension cables are the flat type
Ill go look for some twisted pair cable tomorrow

Tony J


"Floyd L. Davidson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Tony" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> ...
>>So my question is :- As I am using normal phone extension plug and
>>sockets
>>from my local hardware shop, are these the correct cables to use?
>
> Generally the plugs and sockets make no difference.
>
> What counts is the cable. I would highly suggest that you just
> run CAT5 cable.
>
> In fact though, any quality UTP (unshielded twisted pair)
> telephone or data cable will be fine. Just make sure that it is
> *twisted* *pair*! Any of the "flat satin" type cables, and some
> that has four wires (red, green, yellow and black) and looks
> just like other cable with the same colors that is twisted pair,
> are *not* suitable for anything longer than maybe 10-12 feet.
>
> --
> Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)

Tony wrote:
> I have a Belkin wireless adsl router mounted on a roof approx 70meters from
> my incoming phone point.
> Well, I have a lot of trouble getting the router to login to BT, so just to
> test it I connected it directly to my Phone socket and it works perfectly.
> So my question is :- As I am using normal phone extension plug and sockets
> from my local hardware shop, are these the correct cables to use?
>
> Tony J
>
>
There is a maximum length of phone cable before you reach the DSL modem.
Too long and it causes problems.

Bob

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:56:00 -0500, Bob Alston
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Tony wrote:
>> I have a Belkin wireless adsl router mounted on a roof approx 70meters from
>> my incoming phone point.
>> Well, I have a lot of trouble getting the router to login to BT, so just to
>> test it I connected it directly to my Phone socket and it works perfectly.
>> So my question is :- As I am using normal phone extension plug and sockets
>> from my local hardware shop, are these the correct cables to use?
>>
>> Tony J

>There is a maximum length of phone cable before you reach the DSL modem.
> Too long and it causes problems.
>Bob

Not so. The DSL splitter and microfilters have a direct through
connection between the MPOE (minimum point of entry) at the NID
(network interface device) also known as the protector. It's exactly
like an extension cord directly to the phone line. With a splitter,
cable length is not an issue because there is only one pair of wires
running at DSL frequencies (about 100Khz -> 1.2MHz). However, if you
use microfilters, the cable between the MPOE and the splitter can act
as a "bridged tap", stub, unterminated line, or whatever. If long
enough, these might affect the ADSL frequency response and reduce
performance. If really long, the can put a notch in the frequency
response. This is the real advantage of using a splitter over
microfilters in that it isolates the ratty house wiring from the ADSL
part of the circuit. Usually, there's little effect on loops of less
than 2 miles at 1500/256 kbit/sec. However at the loop length
approaches 3 miles, the line characteristics become somewhat critical.
The extra garbage wiring between the MPOE and the microfilters can
(and do) make a difference. If you're at the bitter edge of the 3
mile limit, use a splitter.

Anyway, the length of wire between the MPOE and the DSL modem makes
little difference. However, the length wire between the MPOE and the
numerous microfilters might be a problem. Use CAT5 or twisted pair so
that it doesn't pickup garbage from AM radio stations, motors, lights,
etc. The flat telco cable will work, but I wouldn't use more than
about 50ft of it due to losses (it's made of tinsel) and lack of
twisting (it will pickup some EMI).

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
# (E-Mail Removed)
# (E-Mail Removed) AE6KS

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:56:00 -0500, Bob Alston
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>Tony wrote:
>>
>>>I have a Belkin wireless adsl router mounted on a roof approx 70meters from
>>>my incoming phone point.
>>>Well, I have a lot of trouble getting the router to login to BT, so just to
>>>test it I connected it directly to my Phone socket and it works perfectly.
>>>So my question is :- As I am using normal phone extension plug and sockets
>>>from my local hardware shop, are these the correct cables to use?
>>>
>>>Tony J
>
>
>>There is a maximum length of phone cable before you reach the DSL modem.
>> Too long and it causes problems.
>>Bob
>
>
> Not so. The DSL splitter and microfilters have a direct through
> connection between the MPOE (minimum point of entry) at the NID
> (network interface device) also known as the protector. It's exactly
> like an extension cord directly to the phone line. With a splitter,
> cable length is not an issue because there is only one pair of wires
> running at DSL frequencies (about 100Khz -> 1.2MHz). However, if you
> use microfilters, the cable between the MPOE and the splitter can act
> as a "bridged tap", stub, unterminated line, or whatever. If long
> enough, these might affect the ADSL frequency response and reduce
> performance. If really long, the can put a notch in the frequency
> response. This is the real advantage of using a splitter over
> microfilters in that it isolates the ratty house wiring from the ADSL
> part of the circuit. Usually, there's little effect on loops of less
> than 2 miles at 1500/256 kbit/sec. However at the loop length
> approaches 3 miles, the line characteristics become somewhat critical.
> The extra garbage wiring between the MPOE and the microfilters can
> (and do) make a difference. If you're at the bitter edge of the 3
> mile limit, use a splitter.
>
> Anyway, the length of wire between the MPOE and the DSL modem makes
> little difference. However, the length wire between the MPOE and the
> numerous microfilters might be a problem. Use CAT5 or twisted pair so
> that it doesn't pickup garbage from AM radio stations, motors, lights,
> etc. The flat telco cable will work, but I wouldn't use more than
> about 50ft of it due to losses (it's made of tinsel) and lack of
> twisting (it will pickup some EMI).
>
Well that's not what Verizon told me. And when I removed the 50' phone
cord between the wall and the DSL modem, and replaced it with the
supplied cable, my download speed tests improved.

Bob

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 18:21:52 -0500, Bob Alston
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Well that's not what Verizon told me. And when I removed the 50' phone
>cord between the wall and the DSL modem, and replaced it with the
>supplied cable, my download speed tests improved.
>
>Bob

Amazing. Are you using a splitter at the MPOE (or inside the NID) or
microfilters? Cable length might make a small difference with
microfilters, but it should have no affect with a splitter.

My guess(tm) is that it may have been a type of cable problem. If the
original 50ft cable were flat tinsel cable, it might have been
slightly inductive from the way the cable is made. It might also be
somewhat high resistance. What type of cable was replaced?

Incidentally, I've installed quite a few DSL modems and troubleshot
quite a few "slow" installations. In most cases, I can fix it with a
splitter. I have run long 100ft or more cables, but I always use CAT5
for the long runs, never flat cable or round untwisted station wire.
There may be a short flat cable between the wall plug and the ADSL
modem.

I just did a quick test. I added 3ea 50ft sections of flat 4
conductor stranded (not tinsel) flat telco wires to our ancient
Alcatel 1000 ADSL office modem and ran the SBC Speed Test. Same speed
with and without the added 150ft of cable. Incidentally, we use a
splitter, not microfilters. It's not the length, it's the type of
cable.

Incidentally, if your ADSL modem has internal diagnostics, you can
tell if you have a screwed up system by looking at the S/N ratio and
xmit levels. If your modem doesn't, then my standard test for
internal wiring goofs is to unplug the entire house at the NID, and
install the ADSL modem directly to the incoming phone line with a
short cable. If that works, look for wiring or microfilter problems.

Hmmm... Just a double check. Are you *SURE* that you have a
microfilter on every telco device plugged into the line? The usual
omissions are kitchen wall phones, CATV set-top boxes, Satellite
receivers, burglar alarms, credit card machines, secret phones in the
kids room, and garage phones. A missing microfilter will cause all
kinds of horrible problems (another reason why I like splitters).



--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
# (E-Mail Removed)
# (E-Mail Removed) AE6KS

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 18:21:52 -0500, Bob Alston
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>Well that's not what Verizon told me. And when I removed the 50' phone
>>cord between the wall and the DSL modem, and replaced it with the
>>supplied cable, my download speed tests improved.
>>
>>Bob
>
>
> Amazing. Are you using a splitter at the MPOE (or inside the NID) or
> microfilters? Cable length might make a small difference with
> microfilters, but it should have no affect with a splitter.
>
> My guess(tm) is that it may have been a type of cable problem. If the
> original 50ft cable were flat tinsel cable, it might have been
> slightly inductive from the way the cable is made. It might also be
> somewhat high resistance. What type of cable was replaced?
>
> Incidentally, I've installed quite a few DSL modems and troubleshot
> quite a few "slow" installations. In most cases, I can fix it with a
> splitter. I have run long 100ft or more cables, but I always use CAT5
> for the long runs, never flat cable or round untwisted station wire.
> There may be a short flat cable between the wall plug and the ADSL
> modem.
>
> I just did a quick test. I added 3ea 50ft sections of flat 4
> conductor stranded (not tinsel) flat telco wires to our ancient
> Alcatel 1000 ADSL office modem and ran the SBC Speed Test. Same speed
> with and without the added 150ft of cable. Incidentally, we use a
> splitter, not microfilters. It's not the length, it's the type of
> cable.
>
> Incidentally, if your ADSL modem has internal diagnostics, you can
> tell if you have a screwed up system by looking at the S/N ratio and
> xmit levels. If your modem doesn't, then my standard test for
> internal wiring goofs is to unplug the entire house at the NID, and
> install the ADSL modem directly to the incoming phone line with a
> short cable. If that works, look for wiring or microfilter problems.
>
> Hmmm... Just a double check. Are you *SURE* that you have a
> microfilter on every telco device plugged into the line? The usual
> omissions are kitchen wall phones, CATV set-top boxes, Satellite
> receivers, burglar alarms, credit card machines, secret phones in the
> kids room, and garage phones. A missing microfilter will cause all
> kinds of horrible problems (another reason why I like splitters).
>
>
>
I used a splitter and then a filter on the cord going to the phone. This
phone line only had one connection - at the marina. Nice and clean.

The other part of the split line went to the DSL modem.
Yes my initial cable was "dime store" flat, not twisted phone cable, 50
ft as I recall.
Also as I recall the shorter cable, which Verizon supplied was about 7-8
ft of round, I assume, twisted phone cable.

Also, below is the url to a dsl-reports thread about this topic
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/rema...5796~mode=flat

Bob

In article <8eece.92$Rk4.41@okepread05>, Bob Alston
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Well that's not what Verizon told me. And when I removed the 50' phone
> cord between the wall and the DSL modem, and replaced it with the
> supplied cable, my download speed tests improved.

Any cords I've seen supplied by telcos have been 6-12 feet. So I
presume your DSL modem was not 50 feet from the jack if you just
swapped over to the telco cable. I also presume you just had 50 feet of
cable spooled up on the floor (either in a nice looped pile, or a
spagetti mess).

You may have induced crosstalk into the cord by having 50 feet bundled
up.

Also, the cables provided by the telco (that I've seen), are all cat3
UTP... if you used a 50 foot flat cord, you will most definitly get
crosstalk which would likely degrade the DSL signal. If it was round
"station" cable (the kind with 4 solid wires colored red, green,
yellow, black), then it too will develop crosstalk.

Unless you happened to have a cat3 or better UTP cord of 50 feet, and
wound it with alternating loops (loop one way, then loop the other to
break the inductance pattern, much the way you loop live mic cables),
or had it stretched out and not near any sources of inductance
(flourecent lights), then I can't say I'm surprised in the least that
your cable failed.


Oh, and depending on who you talked to at Verizon, don't believe
everything they tell you. Often they just know you need the cable
supplied by them, and make up their own reasons why (or similar 'I know
what is needed, I just don't know why, and no one here trains us in
those details any more' type of issues. It has been a LONG time since
Verizon has had high standards on who they higher (and anyone with
talent has moved up the line to where they don't see the customer very
often any more).

I no longer let Verizon Com-Techs touch ANY of my wiring without me
present, and if I hear one was in messing with the UG box, I verify all
my lines to see what they knocked out this time while working on
someone else's lines in the building.


-chris

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:02:19 -0500, Bob Alston
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I used a splitter and then a filter on the cord going to the phone. This
>phone line only had one connection - at the marina. Nice and clean.
>The other part of the split line went to the DSL modem.
>Yes my initial cable was "dime store" flat, not twisted phone cable, 50
>ft as I recall.

Bingo. You don't have to go to a dime store to buy junk. You can
also get it at Radio Shack.

>Also as I recall the shorter cable, which Verizon supplied was about 7-8
>ft of round, I assume, twisted phone cable.

I just happen to have a Verizon DSL kit. It's a bit old. Westell
B99-211015-00 modem setup for 0/35 VPI/VCI. The included phone cord
is two wires, apparently twisted, "Line Tech AWM 20251" #26AWG
stranded (not tinsel). Measured length is 15ft.

>Also, below is the url to a dsl-reports thread about this topic
>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/rema...5796~mode=flat

It pretty much agrees with my previous mumbling. It's the wire type,
not the length.


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
# (E-Mail Removed)
# (E-Mail Removed) AE6KS