Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!decwrl!shelby!portia.stanford.edu!jessica.stanford.edu!morgan
From: morgan@jessica.stanford.edu (RL "Bob" Morgan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: 10baseT to thinnet (was Re: Cost-effective method ...)
Message-ID: <1990Oct26.035333.29807@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 26 Oct 90 03:53:33 GMT
References: <1990Oct16.212015.11791@seachg.uucp> <NELSON.90Oct21213409@image.clarkson.edu> <1990Oct23.004917.20350@wang.com> <1990Oct25.003123.7461@jhereg.osa.com> <1990Oct25.090253@synoptics.com>
Sender: news@portia.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Organization: Academic Information Resources
Lines: 14


>> I know that AT&T has a single port TP to TN converter

Hmm, now I could be wrong, but it's my impression that any device with
10Base-T on one side and 10Base-2 on the other must be a repeater, no
matter how small a box it's in.  As such, people installing them
should be aware that they impose a repeater's worth of delay, 
bit-regeneration, etc.  I think calling it a "converter" or anything
other than a repeater is very misleading, since the unwary may think
it's just a balun or something.

 - RL "Bob" Morgan
   Networking Systems
   Stanford