If this were a casual situation, we might do what you suggest.  But
using a cable that is too long is known to be a source of intermittent
and odd problems.  In this situation we'd rather do it right once and
not worry about errors happening when we least want them.

This is a pretty good if not detailed explanation of the length limit:
http://www.duxcw.com/faq/network/cablng.htm

Basically, as I understand it, when the Ethernet sender ships out the
packet it will wait for an acknowledge from the destination.  The
signals running through the cable are very, very fast but are not
instant to the other end.  When the cable is too long, the sender
could declare a time out on the acknowledge and resend before the
destination gets the packet.  Collisions or other problems could then
ensue.  So, theoretically, it does not matter much how "good" the
cable is because the limit is based propagation of the signals.

Alan

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Bob Elzer <bob.elzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> But you have to run a cable either way ?
>
> So if you run the 400 ft, and then test it, if it works with no problems,
> you don't need a switch and you save money.
>
> If it's not up to par, you cut the cable in half, and insert the switch, you
> had to run two anyway.
>
> Remember also the quality of the cable matters, poor cable means poor
> signal.
>
> BTW, who wrote that, switch makers or cable makers LOL.
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss