Broadband in Shed

bazmc35

Is it possible to transfer my home broadband to my shed which is 200m away??

TheChizler

You could run cat 6 cable down with a galvanic isolation unit at one end to make it electrically safe, but at 200 m speed would never be great. There are wireless solutions out there but this might be a suitable use of fiber. You can get premade cables with molded termination plugs and optical to electrical converters aren't too expensive. Whatever solution you go for if you want decent speeds it'll cost a couple of hundred Euro.

TheChizler

TheChizler wrote: »

You could run cat 6 cable down with a galvanic isolation unit at one end to make it electrically safe, but at 200 m speed would never be great. There are wireless solutions out there but this might be a suitable use of fiber. You can get premade cables with molded termination plugs and optical to electrical converters aren't too expensive. Whatever solution you go for if you want decent speeds it'll cost a couple of hundred Euro.

Actually come to think of it unless you already have a protected duct for the electrical cabling that you could use for the network cable, you'd have to account for that somehow. Which would push the cost in to the thousands, so you'd probably be best looking at some directional wireless solution. They're pricey but cheaper than laying cables for 200 m.

Alternatively would you just pay for wireless broadband for the shed only?

TheChizler

sugarman wrote: »

Where is the shed wired to?

Homeplugs could be an option.

Maybe! But it probably is (and should be!) on its own circuit.

mcquaim

Two of these could do the trick:

TP-LINK CPE510 5GHz 300Mbps 13dBi Outdoor Customer Premises Equipment https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00N3SW7X4/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_U9eUwbD7GSXWS

dslamjack

Thank's,mcquaim,that's one very handy piece of kit and very reasonable,fair due's

TheChizler

I didn't realize they came that cheap!

domeld

TheChizler wrote: »

You could run cat 6 cable down with a galvanic isolation unit at one end to make it electrically safe, but at 200 m speed would never be great. There are wireless solutions out there but this might be a suitable use of fiber. You can get premade cables with molded termination plugs and optical to electrical converters aren't too expensive. Whatever solution you go for if you want decent speeds it'll cost a couple of hundred Euro.

10/100/1000BASE-T connection is up to 100m.

Best option is wireless or fibre.

TheChizler

domeld wrote: »

10/100/1000BASE-T connection is up to 100m.

Best option is wireless or fibre.

Yep, that's why I pointed out speed wouldn't be great. Might auto-negotiate to 10 Mb/s depending on the quality of the cable.

bazmc35

Wow them TP links are a cheap piece of kit. So basically 2 of these are needed, one in the house and other in the shed and jobs done.?? Has anybody used these, and any noticeable drop in speeds or latency delay?

mass_debater

mcquaim wrote: »

Two of these could do the trick:

TP-LINK CPE510 5GHz 300Mbps 13dBi Outdoor Customer Premises Equipment https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00N3SW7X4/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_U9eUwbD7GSXWS

I've had issues with these over time, Ubiquiti m5s have a much more solid firmware and similar in price. You also need to add a wireless access point in the shed if you need Wi-Fi
NanoStation Loco M5 2-pack https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00I4QKB56/ref=cm_sw_r_other_awd_CClUwb9TNNXA5

If done right you'll add 2ms to the ping times

mcquaim

mass_debater wrote: »

I've had issues with these over time, Ubiquiti m5s have a much more solid firmware and similar in price. You also need to add a wireless access point in the shed if you need Wi-Fi
NanoStation Loco M5 2-pack https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00I4QKB56/ref=cm_sw_r_other_awd_CClUwb9TNNXA5

If done right you'll add 2ms to the ping times

Cheers, useful info!

Are they not slower though? 150 v 300Mbps?

Scruff

wow, these could be my answer when rural FTTH gets rolled out and stop a few hundred meters from my house. Time to check the map and get neighborly!

Scruff

ugh quick reply double post.
nice bits of kit though and much cheaper that i would have thought also

mass_debater

mcquaim wrote: »

Cheers, useful info!

Are they not slower though? 150 v 300Mbps?

Yes but would probably perform as good. Ubiquiti have a long history in specialising in this gear and is preferred by ISPs. You also have these which are identical but with slightly bigger antennas so a few decibels better signal
NanoStation M5 2-pack https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00I4QFC1E/ref=cm_sw_r_other_awd_H.zUwb51DZ8CV

TheChizler

mcquaim wrote: »

Cheers, useful info!

Are they not slower though? 150 v 300Mbps?

They're limited by the ethernet port speed (100 Mb/s) anyway so the theoretical wireless speed isn't the limiting factor when it's a one-to-one link.

mass_debater

TheChizler wrote: »

They're limited by the ethernet port speed (100 Mb/s) anyway so the theoretical wireless speed isn't the limiting factor when it's a one-to-one link.

You wouldn't hit that on any of the sets listed here, I'd estimate 60-80mbit throughout on any of the sets listed here setup correctly with a but of channel analysis and no noise. I have a set of m5s going 300m between my parents house to my brothers and this is what they are achieving on the edge of a small town. I do a channel scan every so often to maintain optimum throughput because it's possible for anyone else to add devices nearby and cause problems.

domeld

TheChizler wrote: »

Yep, that's why I pointed out speed wouldn't be great. Might auto-negotiate to 10 Mb/s depending on the quality of the cable.

It will not sync at all.

TheChizler

domeld wrote: »

It will not sync at all.

I've done it! That or the box of cable lied to me...

mass_debater

TheChizler wrote: »

I've done it!

Maybe, but you cannot trust it. Ethernet is a radio signal over twisted pairs, it does not get slow if you go over 100m, it gets to a point where it just does not work at all. If you're dropping to 10M one of your pairs has gone over the limit, the other pair will not be far off

TheChizler

mass_debater wrote: »

Maybe, but you cannot trust it. Ethernet is a radio signal over twisted pairs, it does not get slow if you go over 100m, it gets to a point where it just does not work at all. If you're dropping to 10M one of your pairs has gone over the limit, the other pair will not be far off

Absolutely not, so emphasis on the maybe. It's possible you could get 100 Mb/s over 150 m but if it was my money I wouldn't risk it. The above radios seem like the answer, but if you were to insist on copper you could possibly put a PoE injector on both ends and put PoE powered switches in waterproof boxes 70 m from either end. But that's bordering on ridiculous!

gctest50

mass_debater wrote: »

Maybe, but you cannot trust it.

Maybe. Maybe ffs

You can unMaybe it a good few times with extenders

this sort of yoke:

http://www.amazon.com/Ethernet-Extender-Repeater-Signal-Booster/dp/B00M2O1IGW


buy or make them, just glorified 2 port poe-powered switches

mass_debater

gctest50 wrote: »

Maybe. Maybe ffs

You can unMaybe it a good few times with extenders

this sort of yoke:

http://www.amazon.com/Ethernet-Extender-Repeater-Signal-Booster/dp/B00M2O1IGW


buy or make them, just glorified 2 port poe-powered switches

Sorry, I meant maybe because I've seen situations where others managed to get Ethernet up to 160m, wouldn't recommend it and wouldn't like to depend on it. I also wouldn't recommend repeating, it just creates another point of failure and at that expense fibre becomes cost effective

editorsean

Generally I do not recommend running Ethernet between two buildings due to the high risk of picking up spikes from nearby lightning strikes. For example, one neighbour recently had a strike hit their front lawn, so if there was an Ethernet cable running through the ground, it would likely have picked up a significant spike as the lightning dissipated through the ground.

I would suggest running a fibre optic cable, such as using a pair of Ethernet to SC Fibre converters (example) and a 150 SC Fibre cable. The fibre cable will probably the biggest cost, such as this 150M example for £145. It may also have better reliability as a fibre cable is likely to deteriorate than an outdoor mounted antenna.

Donne

TheChizler wrote: »

You could run cat 6 cable down with a galvanic isolation unit at one end to make it electrically safe, but at 200 m speed would never be great. There are wireless solutions out there but this might be a suitable use of fiber. You can get premade cables with molded termination plugs and optical to electrical converters aren't too expensive. Whatever solution you go for if you want decent speeds it'll cost a couple of hundred Euro.

Hey,
What is the advantage of Cat6 cable over Cat5?
Thanks

TheChizler

Donne wrote: »

Hey,
What is the advantage of Cat6 cable over Cat5?
Thanks

To put is simply, at their limit of 100 m, Cat 5 can handle 10/100 Mb/s line rate, Cat 5e 10/100/1000 Mb/s, and Cat 6 can go up to 10 Gb/s, so it's a future proofing cable. Probably be a few years before 10 G devices become mainstream.