Can anyone offer an explanation for the ages-back decision to use two\ndifferent pin alignments for CAT-5/RJ45 networking plugs/sockets? You know\nthe way you need a crossover when the alignments are identical and a\nstraight through when they're mirrored?\n\nCould it have been as simple as someone just imagining that all cables\nwould be straight-throughs because no one would deviate from the standard\npattern of router->[switch/hub]->Host?\n\nI still remember my CCNA tutor having to stop and think when I pointed out\nthat if all sockets had the same pinout and all cables were crossovers\nthen there'd never be any problem..\n\nOn further thought, I can see that even under my supposed 'common sense'\napproach, you'd still sometimes want straight-throughs for extension\npurposes. Hmm, actually, no, you wouldn't would you, just make the inline\nconnectors also all crossover. So an extended link would be\n[crossover-cable]-[crossover-inline]-[crossover-cable] and it would still\nwork perfectly.\n\nSo, what was the thinking? Does anyone have an idea?\n\nDave J.