Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Ecclesine who wrote (4819)	1/5/2002 5:37:57 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 46821

Peter, ftth, In the scheme that you both have been discussing, does "loop aggregation," i.e., inverse multiplexing over multiple twisted pairs. take place? This is the approach that Actelis has promoted, claiming the ability to support super-100 Mb/s rates over similar (or even greater?) distances. Sometimes using up to 8 or 12 pairs of copper in the process. Oy. I found the earlier statement about the need to employ optimal cabling unclear. Even if straightaway speeds are achievable I would think that concerns over near- and far-end cross-talk (NEXT and FEXT) would be paramount here, if both directions of transmission are taking place over a single pair, or even over two pairs, within a single binder. Is, perhaps, screened cabling being used here, where sub-bundles are shielded from one another within the sheath in order to separate the pairs in each direction? The foregoing form of screening was/is sometimes used to separate each direction of a four-wire T1 line. Curious. TIA, FAC