CAT 5 vs CAT 6

Discussion in 'Linux Networking' started by alen.zakary, Mar 4, 2006.

  1. alen.zakary

    alen.zakary Guest

    Hi guys,

    I have a question in regards to CAT5 cabling vs CAT6 cabling. I have a
    high-end production printer XEROX DC 470ST. I am thinking of setting up
    a gigabit network with a Fedora Core print server, my concern is that
    the NIC in the printer is a 10/100.

    Will I have any problems if I switch to a gigabit network, even though
    the NIC in the printer is a 10/100. Does anyone have any advice for me,
    before I venture on this mission?

    Thanks in advance.

    alen.zakary, Mar 4, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. alen.zakary

    alen.zakary Guest

    Oh yeah one more thing, what is the best Distro which has the most
    support for high end printers. Any suggestions?

    alen.zakary, Mar 4, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. alen.zakary

    Moe Trin Guest

    Yeah, but that has nothing to do with CAT5/6.
    Use a multi-speed switch. That portion of the LAN that is running at gigabit
    speed will do so, and the port connecting to the printer will run at 10 or
    100 Megabit.

    Old guy
    Moe Trin, Mar 4, 2006
  4. écrivait
    No specific distro.

    Have a look at the CUPS software.

    Antoine EMERIT, Mar 5, 2006
  5. alen.zakary

    CJT Guest

    FWIW, I've never seen a gigabit switch that wouldn't also work just fine
    at 10/100, so that can be reduced to "Use a (gigabit) switch."

    That portion of the LAN that is running at gigabit
    CJT, Mar 5, 2006
  6. alen.zakary

    Unruh Guest

    So why exactly do you want gigabit networking? Certainly not for the
    printer since it cannot handle gigabit.
    You network will run a 100Mbps, unless you have isolating switches, and
    even then...
    Since he does ot show us the topology, it is hard to know. One does NOT
    want that gigabit switch to switch everything to 100Mbs when one 100Mbs
    thing is on the line.

    Sorry, that switch cannot store 900Mbs It has to run the line from the
    server to the printer at 100Mbs, or it will get swamped. Now, it may be
    able to handle 100Mbs for communication with the printer and 1GBs for
    others, but it sounds messy. The easiest thing to do would simply to slow
    everything down to 100Mbs.

    But they might well be smarter than that (or ratehr you should make sure
    that what you buy is smarter than that).
    Unruh, Mar 5, 2006
  7. alen.zakary

    CJT Guest

    I've never seen one that would. They're store-and-forward devices.
    I doubt there will be any problem. I run a mix of 10/100/1000 devices,
    and they all just get along, even with the cheapest gigabit switch I
    could find.
    CJT, Mar 6, 2006
  8. alen.zakary

    Ken K Guest

    FYI: There is also gigabit rated CAT5
    Ken K, Mar 6, 2006

  9. At this moment (and for the last hour or so {8^), I'm running a large rsync
    from a machine with SATA drives and a GigE port to a machine with IDE
    drives and a 100BaseT port (via a GigE-capable switch). Obviously, a naive
    setup could swamp some component. But it's not occurring.

    I'd guess that TCP's sliding window is what keeps the GigE sender from
    sending more than a 100BaseT port can handle. Or perhaps ssh or rsync
    themselves have some mechanism of that sort.

    If I were using a connectionless protocol, the situation might be different.
    In that case, I'd guess that the switch would start dropping packets it
    couldn't pass on. That would let the application layer sort things out.

    [I was thinking about raising the GigE port's MTU to 9000, which would yield
    packets too large to be handled by the 100BaseT port. That might cause
    problems, but I didn't actually try it. I suspect that a negotiation would
    "fix" that down to 1500.]

    - Andrew
    Andrew Gideon, Mar 6, 2006
  10. alen.zakary

    Moe Trin Guest

    On 5 Mar 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
    That would be a big surprise to about 60 of my users here, who are on a
    Gigabit link, but insist on keeping their expensive color printer that
    ONLY runs at 10 Megabit. Maybe you want to look at RFC0793 and look at
    page 15 (figure 3) and tell us why that variable named "Window" would not
    control the problem. They are also using jumbo frames on the Gigabit net
    - wonder how that works. ;-)
    All of the switches I've seen handle it without much of a problem. At the
    worst case, the switch only has to store about 65000 bits for the slow

    Old guy
    Moe Trin, Mar 7, 2006
  11. alen.zakary

    CJT Guest

    I doubt very many SOHO switches will handle jumbo frames properly.
    CJT, Mar 7, 2006
  12. alen.zakary

    alen.zakary Guest

    Actually the computers on the network all have gigabit NIC's, the
    reason for gigabit was to be able to transfer files back and forth
    quickly. We might want to ransfer files to the printer directly, but
    since it only has a 10/100 NIC maybe its not wise.

    The printer has a 20 GB Hard-drive built into it.

    alen.zakary, Mar 7, 2006
  13. alen.zakary

    Moe Trin Guest

    We removed that last vestige of the original 3Base5 coaxial Ethernet about
    eight years ago, when we started installing fiber, and I think the last of
    the 10Base5 coax is now gone. We _still_ have a small amount of Cat3 in
    several buildings, and it's being replaced with Cat5 for compatibility
    reasons. About half of out networks are 100BaseT, and most of the rest is
    either Gigabit copper or fiber, but there are still at least fifty systems
    with 10BaseT NICs because that's all that will work with them - mainly
    printers and old irreplaceable hardware.
    Hasn't been a problem for us.
    A page of ordinary ASCII text is something like 5KB. At 300 dpi black and
    white - it's a Megabyte. Then you have the pointy haired boss who needs to
    have his documents at 1600 dpi in 32 bit color so that you can see the
    subtle nuances is the color of the Crayons he's using...

    One of the things many people forget is that the documents they print are
    stored temporarily on that disk. If you are subject to HIPAA (Health
    Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) or Sarbanes-Oxley,
    or similar (relating to the protection of information), you have to
    remember that.

    Old guy
    Moe Trin, Mar 8, 2006
  14. You have *NO* idea what you're talking about. Everyone who read the
    paragraph above is dumber for it.

    David Schwartz, Mar 10, 2006
  15. The line is blurring. There are $400 gigabit switches that are
    officially considered SOHO that have features what would have been unheard
    of on a SOHO router two years ago. See, for example:

    David Schwartz, Mar 10, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.