Recommendations for >100m Cat6A links

Hello,

I've got a project in which a >100m Cat6A link is planned between two buildings. In each building, I'll install a couple of CRS324-24P switches. This link terminations should be directly plugged into these CRS324 switches.

I'm currently wondering what I should ask to the man pulling this Cat6A link.

To comply with 100m limit, I'm thinking about splitting the link in two shorter parts and using a GPeR (plus an IP67 case). The downside of this is Gigabit speed limit. Going over 1000Mb/s is not a hard requirement but being capable of doing it some time in the future, is.

Any recommendation on this ?

Is there any reason we shouldn't hope for a multi-Gigabit GPeR in the future ?

Best regards

Why use Copper? Sounds like fiber is the best way to go.

Also because there are no risks of ground loops and anyway fiber makes the two buildings galvanically isolated and "lightning proof".

Maybe

can't pull fiber links.

What is the difference in the simple manual work to be done?
Thinner, more flexible .. only advanteges of FO cable.

Agree, FO cable with 4 strands is about the same diameter as CAT6A cable.

@olivier2831 Go with FO cable if possible. You don't need to worry about length, repeaters, speed etc. Adding repeaters and splitting cables just adds more possible point of failures...

No worries about

  • power noisees coming from cables put in the same pipe/tray,
  • water
  • being resistant to wiretapping
  • almost unlimited speed :slight_smile: if you aggregate more fibers
  • labor cost
  • cable cost

Ethernet over Cat6A is limited to 100 meters. Anything over 100 meters will cause signal degradation, packet loss, etc. and has nothing to do with speeds. You can put a switch halfway in between to act as a signal regeneration point, but that would mean you now have a powered device outdoors to contend with. The answer to solving this is to use fiber optic cabling, as everyone else here has said, because it was designed for longer distances.

CRS324-24P does not exist. I assume it is CRS328-24P-4S+RM.

You can use somewhere in the middle:

https://mikrotik.com/product/gper

But if you can, use fiber optics. You can order patchcord of any length you want, for example from fs.com

I agree with you all: fiber seems more convenient in this domain for the mentioned reasons.

In this project, I don't why copper was specified nor what is supposed to happen when chosen path collides with chosen media (as in building projects involving tens of different companies, people stick to original blueprint as much as possible).

I should have added that projected path mostly passes through an underground parking lot. During project planning phase, an architect may forget to check if later defined path has a chance to exceed 100m mark.

IMHO FO cable is cheper than copper one so it should be noe problem to switch one medium type to another, even if cost of clamping the connectors be added.

being resistant to wiretapping

That´s a misconception. You can as easily wiretap fiber as Cu. You can couple out some light of any fiber, by just attaching a second fiber. You can also just buy passive taps and non polish connectors, then you cut the fiber, install connectors, attach taps. Takes 20mins.

Other than this point, I think besides it being unsuitable for PoE, there are no real drawbacks to using fiber.

Wiretapping fiber is even done on the bottom of the sea ... so why wouldn't it be possible on land ?

OK, you are right but the misunderstanding comes from my unproper wording

  • it's much harder to install FO connectors on FO than on copper - cutting, polishing, .... vs 1-min clamping task for RJ45
  • I meant that that "listening to the data flowing copper" is easy withot touching it, "watching the data on FO" is much, much harder.

Is there a particular reason that you need to have a cable connection (copper or fibre)? You could consider a wireless link between buildings using something like the Wireless Wire products such as:

  1. Wireless Wire: Speed 1Gbps, Range 200+ m
  2. Wireless Wire nRAY: Speed 2G/s, Range 1500+m
  3. Wireless Wire Cube Pro: Speed 5GHz 802.11 a/n/ac, Range 2400+ m

IMHO:
From a reliability point of view: if cable is possible, ALWAYS use cable over wireless.
You can use wireless as backup in such cases, if needed. But if it already was foreseen to put in a cable, use it.

FWIW it's not mentioned if there is a clean line of sight so it might even not be possible at all.

Whenever I can (technically, financially, ...) , I favor using cables instead of wireless though Mikrotik's PtP wireless are very attractive solutions when you have Line of Sight (I've used these and wouldn't hesitate to do it again).

Yep, RJ45 is easier to install, but there are also non-polish connectors. You get much higher attenuation though, which is still acceptable for short runs. Removing the sheathing, then making a good cut requires some tries to master.

I do not say it's impossible. Just harder. On the other hand you have to find the proper FO fiber to listen to as I do not expect having simple 1 fiber cable. Usually there are 4/8/12, so you have to find the one that is inetersting or clamp 4/8/12 connectors to "jump in" ... not "not doable" but time consuming.

There are companies who can sell you fiber optic cables as long as you need and they can install connectors whatever connector type you need. So you can get ready-made cable with connectors. You just have to measure the lenght of the cable. Few extra meters cost nothing. Better little longer than too short.

Another thing, if you are not yet started your cable project, install a tubing (50-100mm diameter) to the ground and pull the cable to the tube. With the cable, pull another rope to the tube for future needs if you have to install more cables. You can hire equipment to pull the first cable, or some special tubings have a thin metal wire inside to do the job. Check internet.

When installing fiber with connectors, you must protect connectors carefully.

And like someone pointed, fs.com have what you need. 110m armoured fibre with connectors cost about 150€.