• Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    I needed to get internet to a building that’s around 400 feet away. I had the opportunity to get a trench dug, so I took a gamble, laid a conduit and ran shielded CAT6. I say gamble because that’s over the rated limited of CAT cable, but I figured it was going to be easier then trying to get a reliable wiki bridge running. The home network itself has been solid since.

    • ThomasLadder_69@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      If you have poe on the output end, there are repeaters that you could have buried along with the cable. Not a big enough signal difference in your case to be worth it probably but worth noting for other folks.

        • ikidd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Packet loss is primarily a CRC thing. You might get 99% of a packet, but it fails the error check so it’s dropped and re-requested.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      shielded

      FYI, the shield only does something if you ground it, and you need to be very careful to only ground one end so as to not introduce a ground loop. If it wasn’t grounded then regular unshielded Cat6 probably would have performed the same.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        It’s grounded. It’s also running parallel to an underground power line, but I made sure to maximize the distance between the two as much as I could. Around 12 inches if I remember correctly. No issues that I knew how to test for at the time and it’s been about ten years with no need to modify anything. Something I knew I would have had to do by now if gone with a wifi bridge.