upvote
Yeah, I use DAC for the desktop and fibre between floors. It's just the Mac's desktop that uses RJ45 copper.
reply
deleted
reply
> I looked in to it and it seemed like 10gbit was much better over fiber.

Yes, except that most devices use Ethernet. So, at the end of the day, you still need Ethernet cables unless you want to deal with an additional switch or converter in every room.

reply
Fiber/10Gbase-*R is Ethernet too. Please say copper/RJ45/base-T when you mean copper/RJ45/base-T.
reply
If you want to ackshually, both fiber and copper are empty pipes that can carry any layer 2 protocol, and are not inherently Ethernet. They only become Ethernet cables when they're connected to terminals that pass that protocol through them.

Unless we're defining some networking standard, "Ethernet cable" is a perfectly acceptable term. Everyone will understand what is meant. The added specificity you're asking for doesn't improve the quality of communication.

reply
That's why I added base-*R/base-T.

And particularly for 10GE the heat and power problems are due to the copper transceiver DSPs.

And people nerdy enough to run 10GE at home might well run fibre.

So, no, the specifity is needed and useful.

reply
>That's why I added base-*R/base-T.

You're still talking about a cable. The cable may be compatible with those standards, but you can put anything through it. It's just a physical connection.

>And people nerdy enough to run 10GE at home might well run fibre. So, no, the specifity is needed and useful.

No, because if you say "which do you want? Ethernet or fiber?" no one will look at you like if you asked if they want salt or beef. It's technically incorrect, but everyone will understand what is being asked.

reply
> You're still talking about a cable. The cable may be compatible with those standards, but you can put anything through it. It's just a physical connection.

If you want to ackshually, the post I was replying to was talking about what "devices use" and cables required for that, so it's in fact about what standards these devices support.

Apart from that, again, in the context of 10GE you can by no means assume copper when talking about an Ethernet port; SFP+ slots are quite common. Your assertion that "everyone will understand" is also something I plainly know to be untrue in my bubble. It may be true in the context of slower speeds, but for ≥10GE the general performance characteristics of twisted-pair copper transceivers are so bad as to make it into the crossover point from copper cabling into DAC cables and fibre.

And, honestly, the assumption that "Ethernet = copper cabling" is harmful for 10GE. Those transceivers are hot garbage in the literal sense, they run hot enough to warrant usage limitations on switches due to cooling/overheating limits, and they tend to be quite picky about cable quality on establishing links.

reply
>the post I was replying to was talking about what "devices use" and cables required for that

Yes, that person said "most devices use Ethernet", to which you correctly pointed out they meant to say RJ45. However, in the process of making that correction you made an unrelated error yourself in saying that fiber is Ethernet too.

>you can by no means assume copper when talking about an Ethernet port

You can, if by "Ethernet" you mean an RJ45 jack and its cable, which is a fairly common usage of the word. It doesn't matter that it's technically incorrect. The default idea of physical protocol that the word "Ethernet" invokes in most people is that of twisted pair copper cabling. If you take a random person and put in front of them a fiber optic cable carrying Ethernet and a copper cable carrying serial signals and tell them "would you mind unplugging the Ethernet cable?" they'll disconnect the copper cable.

>Your assertion that "everyone will understand" is also something I plainly know to be untrue in my bubble.

Oh, so you know several people who when presented with the dichotomy of Ethernet or fiber (because that's what the comment you replied to was about, as it put Ethernet in contrast with fiber), they'll be completely dumbfounded about what is meant, as if hearing gobbledygook?

reply
> Oh, so you know several people who when presented with the dichotomy of Ethernet or fiber (because that's what the comment you replied to was about, as it put Ethernet in contrast with fiber), they'll be completely dumbfounded about what is meant, as if hearing gobbledygook?

Yes.

And I've used up the time I'm willing to sink into this subthread, see you around.

reply
Excuse me, I believe you mean GNU/copper/RJ45/base-T
reply
My copper/RJ45/base-T is running musl libc + busybox!
reply
Thank you.
reply
Indeed, that's largely why I decided 10gbit at home isn't really worth it. The current 10gbit ethernet stuff is expensive and power hungry, the enterprise stuff is hard to use on consumer gear. And the only real use case is super fast access to a nas.
reply
I got it solely because our ISP bumped our home fiber to 10Gb and it would’ve hurt my soul for the router to be slower than that. And hey, if you’ve already got a router with 10Gb ports available and ready to go…
reply
> every room

I disagree with that for two reasons. First, my central switch is probably capable of both copper and fiber. Second, how many wired devices do you have spread around your house? Let's say I have an above average number of devices: a router, a NAS, two access points, and three desktops. Router, NAS, and one access point can all be adjacent to the switch and avoid any conversion hassle. The desktops are using fiber so no conversion hassle there. That leaves one copper cable or converter needed for the other access point.

reply
I guess I have rather overestimated what a normal amount of wired devices is based on my own sample size. That or the opposite is happening with you.

My house has a POE doorbell, several POE cameras, 2 TVs that each get a connection to their attached android TV boxes, Wife's office gets a pair of connections, ditto with mine, then you've got the APs for the wireless bits + a few servers in the rack with the networking equipment.

Mind you I know I am on the high side, but I use that as the reference point. I'd figure a normal house would have 4-5 wired connections to my 20ish.

reply
In that situation I'd basically consider the doorbell and cameras as a separate install.

That mainly leaves the TVs, which I would just throw on the wireless but for wiring I'd still say you run it to your central switching spot that handles both copper and fiber.

reply
If you have a fixed computer or NAS, stop making excuses and install a 10G fiber card in it.

If you have a laptop or TV it probably doesn't need 10G.

reply
> If you have a fixed computer or NAS, stop making excuses and install a 10G fiber card in it.

It's hard to justify when Ethernet is catching up. Most new motherboards have a 2.5G port. High-end motherboards have 10G Ethernet ports. SFP cards take space, are ugly, and need directed airflow to stay cool. They are not worth it for a 4x increase in bandwidth at best.

reply
Fibre requires conduit with specific radius bends, making it difficult to route through a house.
reply
Having cabled my apartment with Cat 6 definitely made me prefer fiber, it would have been a breeze instead of pulling thick cables from my office to other rooms. Cat 6 also shouldn’t be bent or you risk it going out of spec, and modern fiber nowadays have bend radius comparable to (or even smaller than) Cat 6.

I see how sloppy some FTTH installs are and they all work fine, and this is for light that travels for long distances.

The only advantage copper has is PoE.

reply
You'd be amazed what exists on the market these days. For example, the pre-terminated InvisiLight fiber cabling is 0.6mm in diameter and has a 2.5mm bend radius. I've personally installed this cabling while making many 90 degree (and sharper in some cases) bends without any issues. That makes it easy to hide and trivial to fit right through doorways and other tight spaces too.
reply