Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!pprg.unm.edu!hc!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!kth!draken!ragge
From: ragge@nada.kth.se (Ragnar Sundblad)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: RG58 C/U vs ThinWire Ethernet?
Message-ID: <1026@draken.nada.kth.se>
Date: 13 May 89 18:49:34 GMT
Organization: Royal Institute Of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 27

I have so far had several kilometers of RG58 C/U been installed at my
department and surroundings. We have made TDR's (looking as beautiful
as I can which), run network benchmarks (showing no problems at all),
etc on these installations, and have had absolutely no problems.  I
have until now not even considered bying the more expensive ThinWire
cable that some vendors provide. (I personally think it would be
easier to get it shorted, since the inner foil normally would not be
cut of where the threads would be, but at the end of the PE filling,
almost where the centerleader pin to the BNC starts. A small lose
thread somewhere in there would probably not be to fun, maybe creating
intermittent hard-to-find problems.)

Now people that usually know something of what they are talking about,
although they are sellers (not of the cable), have told me that it is
not recommendable to build long (100<l<185m) networks with RG58, I
should use this ThinWire cable instead if I don't want to get problems
when there are many nodes connected.

What are your experience? Is there anything in this statement?

(I mentioned this to a cable seller. He told me that "it had something
to do with the timing" (RG58 = ~0.66c, ThinWire = ~0.80c).  As long
as I don't run at the timing margins, I don't give very much for
that (perhapse I could get 0.000001 times better performance :-).)

Ragnar Sundblad, Systems engineer
ragge@nada.kth.se