Do unmanaged switches boost data signal?

DarkDubzs

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
354
Cat5e cables usually start dropping packets at around 300 feet. So if one wanted to run 500 feet of cat5e cable and not have data loss or lose data speed, can they run 300 feet, then connect that to a switch and run 200 more feet from that switch without losing any or much data or losing speed? Would it be less than if they were to run 500 feet of cable directly with no breaks? Just curious.
Thanks in advance for any answers!
 

plugwash

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
1,547
A switch (regardless of whether it is managed or not) fully regenerates the signals.
 

klank

Killer of Killer NIC Threadz
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
2,177
Yes any switch managed or unmanaged will "regenerate the signal". Running 500' of CAT5e might result in a link speed of 10mbit if your lucky. It would be best to add the switch.
 

bigdogchris

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
18,443
Sometimes I'm amazed at what putting a switch at the end of a line will do for the signal.
 

Mackintire

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Messages
2,923
The spec assumes 100 meter using solid ethernet cable with (2) 3' patch cables at the ends.

There are setups that run beyond spec without issue....but this above, is the spec.
 

DarkDubzs

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
354
But some data or packet loss still occurs doesnt it? I mean, cant something only be regenerated so much? Like trying to get an image back to perfection as it originally was with only shreds of the image that have deteriorated with Photoshop... one can only do so much, i assume its the same with electronics and computation.
 

metril

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
414
@OP

Which is why there is error correction. If the checksum isn't correct, resend the packet or use the checksum to fix the error.
 

Liger88

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
2,657
@OP

Which is why there is error correction. If the checksum isn't correct, resend the packet or use the checksum to fix the error.


This. For layer 1 signaling over copper the signal is either flat or rising. Like those little heart monitors you see with the spike graphs. Usually over distance this becomes much less clear as the signal distorts (is it rising or falling?). If you manage to regenerate the signal before it degrades to the point where data is being lost (unreadable signal) then it will just read the weak signal and relaunch it up to another 100m.

Well placed gear and following standards (100m cable) will make this irrelevant.
 

stormy1

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 3, 2008
Messages
1,053
The spec assumes 100 meter using solid ethernet cable with (2) 3' patch cables at the ends.

There are setups that run beyond spec without issue....but this above, is the spec.
I have not seen a 100m run in the real world that would run gb reliable in a single run and sometimes not even 100mb.
100 meters assumes a lab perfect run.
I plan on no longer than 60m and run fiber for anything over.
If forced to I will put a switch every 60 meters but I don't like too.
 

mwarps

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2002
Messages
7,048
But some data or packet loss still occurs doesnt it? I mean, cant something only be regenerated so much? Like trying to get an image back to perfection as it originally was with only shreds of the image that have deteriorated with Photoshop... one can only do so much, i assume its the same with electronics and computation.

If you're losing packets on a local, in-spec wired network, your hardware fucking sucks or you're working in ionizing radiation, in which case you should be wearing a lead vest.

The protocol the hardware speaks has checksums and retries and knows when packets are garbled. Networking (except UDP) is not fire and forget.
 

Shadowspawn

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 17, 2002
Messages
1,870
I have not seen a 100m run in the real world that would run gb reliable in a single run and sometimes not even 100mb.
100 meters assumes a lab perfect run.
I plan on no longer than 60m and run fiber for anything over.
If forced to I will put a switch every 60 meters but I don't like too.

Really? I have, lots of time, even on military bases in the middle east where tactical conditions are less than ideal. Good cable and good Cisco hardware usually equals pretty solid performance.
 

TCM2

Gawd
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
572
But some data or packet loss still occurs doesnt it? I mean, cant something only be regenerated so much? Like trying to get an image back to perfection as it originally was with only shreds of the image that have deteriorated with Photoshop... one can only do so much, i assume its the same with electronics and computation.

That's akin to asking how a packet can make it from Europe to America without degenerating into noise.

A layer 1 connection to a switch ends at the switch. Any further connection is a whole new layer 1 connection totally independent from the others.

Layer 2 on top of that is completely irrelevant to the physical connection.
 

EagleMDB

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
227
I agree, fiber and dude who cares if you have done it, the OP specifically asked with no degredation, every case where checksum or retransmit must be used reduces link speed, because of additional traffic. Which would not meet his requirement (correct?)
 

Liger88

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
2,657
I agree, fiber and dude who cares if you have done it, the OP specifically asked with no degredation, every case where checksum or retransmit must be used reduces link speed, because of additional traffic. Which would not meet his requirement (correct?)


*latency

It would be negligible for just 500m though. It would probably be better to do a single run of fiber if you can, but if you can't 300m + switch + 200m will work just fine OP.
 
S

shade91

Guest
Cat5e cables usually start dropping packets at around 300 feet. So if one wanted to run 500 feet of cat5e cable and not have data loss or lose data speed, can they run 300 feet, then connect that to a switch and run 200 more feet from that switch without losing any or much data or losing speed? Would it be less than if they were to run 500 feet of cable directly with no breaks? Just curious.
Thanks in advance for any answers!

No.. just no. Bad information all around.
 
Top