Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!ucsd!pacbell.com!tandem!netcom!cmilono
From: cmilono@netcom.UUCP (Carlo Milono)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: 10baseT to thinnet (was Re: Cost-effective method ...)
Message-ID: <15618@netcom.UUCP>
Date: 26 Oct 90 16:07:01 GMT
References: <1990Oct25.003123.7461@jhereg.osa.com> <1990Oct25.090253@synoptics.com> <1990Oct26.035333.29807@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Netcom- The Bay Area's Public Access Unix System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 25

In article <1990Oct26.035333.29807@portia.Stanford.EDU> morgan@jessica.stanford.edu (RL "Bob" Morgan) writes:
>
>>> 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

The product from AT&T is *indeed* a repeater, as per the specifications
of 10BASET and should figure into the round-trip-bit-delay equation.
-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                   Carlo Milono                                           |
|    Personal:    netcom!cmilono@apple.com   or   apple!netcom!cmilono     |
|"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere |
| in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." B.Watterson |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+