| Blogs > Grobyc |
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
There are also many different types of devices you could be patching together, many of which are not using Ethernet and not using a Cat5e cable or similar. So "patch cable" is not very specific at all. Because the spec of the cable is often irrelevant for consumer use, calling the cable by the intended use (Ethernet) rather than the spec seems pretty reasonable to me. | ||
|
InvalidID
United States1050 Posts
On October 20 2011 12:51 Myrmidon wrote: But there exist Cat6 and other spec cables that people use to connect devices communicating with one of the Ethernet standards (well, really should be IEEE 802.3). There are also many different types of devices you could be patching together, many of which are not using Ethernet and not using a Cat5e cable or similar. So "patch cable" is not very specific at all. Because the spec of the cable is often irrelevant for consumer use, calling the cable by the intended use (Ethernet) rather than the spec seems pretty reasonable to me. The Ethernet standards include physical layer specifications, of which the assorted CAT's combined with RJ-45 are a part. So indeed it *is* an Ethernet cable, just not exclusive to Ethernet-we commonly use more basic(often obnoxious and proprietary) link layers over Cat5e and RJ-45 physical layers for short distance inter-device communication, as the cables are easy to wire. There are other cables also included under the Ethernet physical layer, such as assorted coax standards that have fallen out of grace due to expense and obnoxiousness to wire. I have never seen CAT5 cables used with any other connector standard then RJ-45 in industry, unless you are wiring a RJ-45 connector to one end and an RS-232 connector to another to cludge together something. There is probably someone out there who does it but it is not the norm. CAT5 and RJ-45 form the de-facto standard for any communication that uses the Ethernet link layer-to the extent that a CAT5 cable with RJ-45 connectors is synonymous with Ethernet, and if you were to use CAT5 cables or RJ-45 connectors with anything else you would be explicitly clear in your spec. As far as wiring schemes versus plugs-in industry parlance RJ-45 is specific to the 8P8C connector in any actual use, and if you say "RJ-45 connector" everyone will know exactly what you mean. On a spec sheet it may be more specific-but on a conference call among engineers it is an Ethernet cable and a crossover cable in industry parlance, even if we never intend to use Ethernet as the link layer. As an example: I was on a conference call earlier this week with one of the biggest network equipment OEM suppliers in the world, and their engineers said they wanted our device to communicate with their device with Ethernet cables, and there was no confusion on either side. | ||
|
DystopiaX
United States16236 Posts
| ||
|
InvalidID
United States1050 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On October 20 2011 12:51 Myrmidon wrote: But there exist Cat6 and other spec cables that people use to connect devices communicating with one of the Ethernet standards (well, really should be IEEE 802.3). There are also many different types of devices you could be patching together, many of which are not using Ethernet and not using a Cat5e cable or similar. So "patch cable" is not very specific at all. Because the spec of the cable is often irrelevant for consumer use, calling the cable by the intended use (Ethernet) rather than the spec seems pretty reasonable to me. Yes I know; I said "generally" and "usually" so that I did not exclude other potential configurations. I simply described the configuration most commonly found in small businesses and home networks. I also linked to the Ethernet wiki page which goes over the IEEE standards and labels ethernet as 802.3. I also never said I was going to go over the different types of devices and what cables would be used to connect them. This was simply a quick glance at it, I'm not teaching a course here. I never said "patch cable" was specific at all either, I said it is enough to prevent me from rolling my eyes. I clearly stated there are many different factors and differences in the cables in the beginning of the third paragraph. Once again, I said I wasn't going in to depth on the matter. If I wanted to go over the things you touched on I could have easily made this twice as long. I agree with InvalidIDs post, and I'm not saying that engineers won't understand what you mean when you say "ethernet cable". I'm saying that it is not technically correct. Of course it is simple and I'm not asking everyone to go preach to their friends otherwise. This is more so for personal knowledge, which is why I linked URLs to further dive in to the topic should the readers wish. | ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
| ||
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
I shall adopt these conventions!  | ||
|
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On October 20 2011 17:06 dakalro wrote: Used for transferring Ethernet frames ... so Ethernet cable works just fine, as does patch which is the default. Plus Ethernet cable can also be BNC with coaxial :D A patch can also be a fiber cable you plug into the media converter card. You could also say it's an IP cable since it transfers IP packets. The IP packets are encapsulated within an ethernet frame which is converted to a digital signal which is sent over a copper (in this case) medium. Why don't we just call it a signal cable? Cat5e prefix to specify further, etc, etc, but once again, patch cable is close enough for it to not bother me so much lol. On October 20 2011 17:53 Sotamursu wrote: People sure like complaining about everything. Yeah, they even complain about complainers. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On October 21 2011 01:43 Grobyc wrote: You could also say it's an IP cable since it transfers IP packets. The IP packets are encapsulated within an ethernet frame which is converted to a digital signal which is sent over a copper (in this case) medium. Why don't we just call it a signal cable? Cat5e prefix to specify further, etc, etc, but once again, patch cable is close enough for it to not bother me so much lol. I disagree with the reasoning here and think you're missing an important point. edit: well maybe not "missing" but not emphasizing something I think that is relevant IP does not define physical layer and can be used over many different kinds of physical medium or wirelessly. 802.3 standard, as pointed out earlier, includes physical layer and MAC/link layer. It defines functional, electrical, and mechanical specs for cables that should be used. This is why there's less ambiguity in what is meant, even though the terminology may not be correct. | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
IP does not define physical layer IP does define physical layer because any layer in the TCP/IP stack includes all of the layers beneath it. IP is constructed of the definitions of data link layer protocols such as ethernet (802.3), wireless (802.11), frame-relay, HDLC, PPP, etc, along with its own network layer definitions, so I'm going to have to disagree with you there. and can be used over many different kinds of physical medium or wirelessly. Right, just like ethernet can be used over different kinds of physical mediums as well, so "ethernet cable" is ambiguous as well, just to a lesser extent. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
To use IP, you will need something underneath it, but IP itself doesn't define those details. How is it "constructed of the definitions of data link layer protocols" and what do you mean by that? An IP packet's payload will contain header information for lower layers, but I don't see what else you mean there. edit: Ethernet can be used with different medium as well, but the specs for those are actually defined, and the majority of deployments use a certain one of those specs. | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On October 21 2011 06:13 Myrmidon wrote: I'm not talking about TCP/IP stack, but how does IP itself (well IPv4 or IPv6, if you will) define other protocol layers? To use IP, you will need something underneath it, but IP itself doesn't define those details. How is it "constructed of the definitions of data link layer protocols" and what do you mean by that? An IP packet's payload will contain header information for lower layers, but I don't see what else you mean there. edit: Ethernet can be used with different medium as well, but the specs for those are actually defined, and the majority of deployments use a certain one of those specs. Okay, poor choice of words on my part. My point was that IP specifies which layer 2 standards it can operate with, which in turn define the functional, electrical, and mechanical specs for cables that should be used. I shouldn't have said IP defines the physical layer [itself], but it defines which layer 2 standards it operates with that do. I hope we can agree here at least. | ||
|
TadH
Canada1846 Posts
On October 16 2011 12:40 Grobyc wrote: I still have about 2-2.5 cups of pot butter Pot is a type of weed, you are a hypocrite. | ||
|
John Madden
American Samoa894 Posts
As long as the meaning stays | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
| ||
|
Torenhire
United States11681 Posts
"An unkeyed 8P8C modular connector, often found on Ethernet cables" LOL gg son. | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
| ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
| ||
|
GigaFlop
United States1146 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
BSL
RSL Revival
Cure vs Rogue
Maru vs TBD
MaxPax vs TBD
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Afreeca Starleague
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
