Tell me if I've got this right.....(please)

Page 1 of 4  
Hello... I would like to run a bit of Cat5 ethernet cable from an access point downstairs to a terminal in a bedroom upstairs. My proposed route is about 16' through the walls (as the tape measure flies), and the first floor has a drop ceiling throughout the area (convenient for lots of things).
This probably is something I should be reading in a book, I know. I've googled a bit and I think I've got it down, but I'd appreciate if anyone can point out any hidden *gotchas* I might run into. Pretty simple procedure, I know, but I'm a n00b, as evidenced by my lack of familiarity with the terminology. Here goes:
1) The first wall (downstairs) is easy, because I have access behind it through a stairwell. In this case I can cut a square hole for the wallbox right next to a stud and nail it in. Easy sneezy.
2) From this box I can run my Cat5e up the stud, across the 'ceiling' in the stairwell, tacking it in place with some 1/2" wire staples. Then I can run it in the 'real ceiling' in the dining room (above the drop ceiling) till I get under the destination bedroom.
3) So then I go upstairs, trying not to get tripped up by the dog that always thinks stairs are a racetrack and find a stud in the wall I want to put the other box in. Have studfinder. I punch a hole in the drywall and cut out the rectangular box with a keyhole saw. I have one of those too now. Hopefully I've really found a stud and not something else, but maybe it doesn't matter as much as I think.
4) Then I get a really effin' long drill bit, like 1/2"x12". I've seen these for masonry but I bet they exist for wood too. So I proceed to drill through my rectangular hole (in as steep of an angle as I can manage) down through the floor inside the wall. I have a cheapie $35 1/2" Black and Decker corded drill that will probably get killed in this process.
5) I use a piece of coat hanger wire, chopstick, or other device to guide a weighted string down through the hole. Go downstairs.
6) Tie string to end of Cat5e cable. Wrap profusely with electrical or duct tape for added measure. If possible, jab Cat5e up through hole in ceiling, enlist household woman to gently pull string until Cat5e emerges from rectangular hole in the wall.
7) Rumor has it, that there are such things as plastic wall boxes that, upon rotating screws, will wedge themselves between studs or drywall, and they won't need to be nailed to anything. At least this is how it's been described. I haven't actually seen one, but thenagain I haven't perused every aisle of The Borg in a little while.
8) I can then either leave the RJ45 ends on my prepurchased Cat5e cable, or I can clip them off, strip the wires and connect them to the back of a female RJ45 modular wall socket. Repeat for other end.
9) Clean up, put away tools, crack open a Sam Adams for myself and the dog, and rejoice in upstairs Internet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

So why run the CAT5e at all? Did you consider wireless upstairs? If you do run the CAT5e, I'd say use a solid core wire and not twisted for the backbone. You will not use the capacity of CAT5e, so wireless makes since.
My vote is #9. You are only coming from an access point - why build the network if it's limited by the network card at 10Mbps. Nothing indicates you need 100Mbps backbone.
Oren
"My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fiber, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes, I've considered Wireless. My main concern with wireless is being bombarded by RF whenever I'm home. I understand some will disagree with me about whether it's a real issue or not. Also, we have a Maytag Neptune washer/dryer pair. Some ng articles indicate that *they* can release RF that can interfere with your wifi stuff. Thirdly, we've got a 2.4Ghz telephone, and most WAPs are also 2.4Ghz. All in all, hardwired seems cheaper and more reliable. Less equipment to use electricity and heat up the house. I've already got 7 computers and the associated networking gear as it is. Yes I realize that makes me a hypocrite. ;-)
True I probably won't need 100mbps rates most of the time. A few of the computers on my LAN (fileserver, webserver etc) actually choke on 7mbs or so.
The destination for the ethernet cable I'm running is going to be a single machine in a bedroom. The rest of the LAN and gateway to the inet is scattered between the office downstairs and the utility closet adjacent to it. I've got the Util closet already wired.
Thanks
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

My wireless drops out by whatever means, and I don't always try to determine why...it comes back. I have some of the same items mentioned above, but it ( interference ) could come from next door also. Since you already have a LAN, add to it. tell the DOG hello!
Oren
"My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fiber, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yeah, i troubleshoot flaky wireless connections all day at work. I want to mess with none of that when I come home.
Dog says hi.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Seven computers? And you need one in the bedroom? And you're worried about getting fried by RF? Why would anyone want a computer in the bedroom? No wait. I don't want to know.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Can't speak for the OP, but in the normal course of business, we would probably have *two* computers in the bedroom.
My wife has her game systems set up there, and she likes to get hints *cough*cheat*cough* when she gets stuck someplace. So she has her old blueberry ibook in there. I used to have a laptop in there so I could browse the web, read email, etc, while hanging out with her while she gamed. My machine needs to be reinstalled, so of late, I've just been reading books on *paper*. (rather than Gutenburg project.)

7 seems like a goodly number. We have (* = or plan to have) the following set up: 1 *Kitchen computer (recipes, etc) 2 LR Laptop for her email/browsing 3 LR Laptop for me for email/browsing/work 4 *Media computer connected to the home theatre. 5 BR computer for her 6 *BR computer for me 7 Home server (web/house automation/gateway to the outside world, etc) 8 *one in the basement once i get my shop in order. 9 *one in the garage for communication phone, etc.
That's 9 computers planned... 4 currently... so 7 is not so out of the question.
Each of these become essentially an entertainment and communication center.
If I ever I get a real/new laptop (rather than 2nd hand ones with shot batteries) I could probably eliminate some of the various laptops scattered around the house and just carry the main one around with me.
I'd like to get a wired AP higher in the house at some point... so I'm going to follow this thread with interest. ;)
--
May no harm befall you,
flip
Ich habe keine Ahnung was das bedeutet, oder vielleicht doch?
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Precisely...
And fwiw, a goodly majority of my machines are headless and older, low-powered machines. My webserver is a Cyrix 150, my fileserver is a Pentium 233. I'll probably just consolidate those two machines. The one I'm wiring ethernet to is for the Missus to run modern games on Windows2000. I've got an old K6-II for running the older games that refuse to run on Win2K/XP, and it will also double as a printcenter and video camera repository. There is a headless media machine that can stream music or video on demand, and then there is my FreeBSD workstation that I primarily use. There's an older linux box that i used to use for software development and OS testing.... Then there's the OpenBSD firewall, etc. etc. blah...
A lot of the roles of these machines will probably change, and i could get by without most of them, but i don't *want* to.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have a computer in my bedroom, connected to WIRED ethernet. I sometimes use it to access the web or other computers from there. Often, that access has been to control my home automation system.
I do turn it off at night, because of the noise. It's controlled by an X10 module and the same macro I use to turn other things off at bedtime. Good thing this computer will start up by itself when it gets power.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@xmail.com0 says...

How do you protect the filesystem when you yank power unceremoniously? Starting a computer when power is supplied is a BIOS option. Generally the default is not to power on when power is restored but there is usually (always IME) an option to power on.
--
Keith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I have been using a computer (always an older one, like Celeron 333) for about 3 years, and haven't seen such a problem yet. Anyway, I keep a good system backup (GHOST) on CD, and could restore it in less than an hour.

And not every computer has it. Something I would consider when choosing a bedroom computer.

BTW, when not in use for anything else, this computer displays a weather map, showing weather conditions, and high (or low) temperatures. This uses a program called "weather watcher".
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Also, microwave ovens operate at close to 2.4Ghz. You may get a free "dinner bell" with a wireless network.

And you never know who's connected to YOUR network.

That's about what I got with Windows 9x. Switching to NT (2000, I will never use XP!) changed that to over 50mbps (for a simple large file transfer).
Compare those to the approximately 5Mbps you get with wireless (considering the large amount of overhead, and the difference between "ideal conditions" and real ones. Expect much lower range than advertised) for 802.11b. I haven't used the newer 802.11g that claims 54Mbps but would expect significantly less than that.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@xmail.com0 says...

Never a problem. At least I keep my microwave door closed when it's in operation. ;-)

Strong encryption solves this problem. We use wireless networks in the conference rooms at work, where they're quite concerned about security.

I won't use XP at home, but am forced to on my company issued laptop.

That's what I normally get at work, vs. the 100Mbit ethernet. In reality both are limitied upstream to about 10Mbit, on a good day. Some servers are even more limiting.
--
Keith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Not just WEP. I've been hearing about it not being very secure any more.

Of course, it's never as secure as a wired network.

Yes, there are reasons for using XP. And a lot of *****s who think it's better because they don't know of anything else (maybe they think AOL is good too).

If that's ethernet (rather than internet) you're talking about, it's symmetrical. The speed will be the same in both directions.
You will be speed-limited on an internet connection, but that has no effect on local traffic (between nodes on your LAN).

Which has to do with why I suggested not using speed test sites (particularly with fast [over 1Mbps] or high latency [like satellite] internet connections).
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@xmail.com0 says...

I believe we're using LEAP. It is secure. A decent wireless implementation won't even be detected by a rogue PC. Of course most don't set up any security.

In many ways it's more secure, since everything on the network is encrypted.

;-)
I meant the speed is limited somewhere up the stream from the local Ethernet rather than in one direction or another. That is, there is a bottleneck somewhere other than the local system to switch.

I have no real need to go to another machine on my LAN. Well, I do log into the UNIX systems at work.

Why? They have nothing I want. ;-)/2
--
Keith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

WAP and WEP can be broken. How does your machine see the AP, just like a software sniffer that can detect them I guess. One can drive any major city and find what's called "decent wireless implementation".

The packets maybe, not the network. Your data packets can be captured across the wire and some sniffers can decode them. Getting to your network can be as simple as plugging into it or by wireless.
Oren "My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fiber, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:29:19 -0800, Oren wrote:

If you find them, they're not "decent wireless implementations". ;-) AIUI they won't respond to improper probes (authentication needed to start the conversation).

Yes, the network. How are you going to decode the packets if you don't have the crypto keys (or lifetime access to Ft. Meade)? Need more security? Do IP tunneling.
--
Keith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The security factor I was considering was physical access to the network. With wired, that's access to the wires. With wireless, it's access to the air.
Then it would be even MORE secure, using encryption on a wired network.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:43:48 -0600, Mark Lloyd wrote:

<snip>
If you only look at one factor of security, your attacker will simply look somewhare else. ;-)

Sure, but "no one" does. Ten years or so ago we had a proposal for encrypting LAN adapters (I was hired and moved to another state lead the project). The proposal added perhaps 1% to the cost of the adapter. Alas, "no one" wanted secure PtP transactions so we got no funding for implementation.
--
Keith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes. I was just mentioning once security factor that's usually lost when you go to wireless. I said nothing about not using others.

Probably not 100% true.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.