Talk:Ethernet physical layer

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ethernet physical layer article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 365 days

Computing: Networking Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Ethernet over twisted-pair cable[edit]

Isn't this drawing incorrectly labelled TIA-B when its TIA-A? What does 'z' mean in the table? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.244.209.138 (talk) 11:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no longer a drawing and the table at Ethernet physical layer#Twisted-pair cable has no TIA label. ~Kvng (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, in the table Early implementations (10 Mbit/s and 1 Mbit/s) says: Runs over four wires (two twisted pairs) on a Category 3 or Category 5 cable. An active hub or switch sits in the middle and has a port for each node. This is also the configuration used for 100BASE-T and gigabit Ethernet. Which seems a bit incorrect, as far as I know Gigabit Ethernet requires 8 wires (four twisted pairs). ibarrera — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibarrera (talk • contribs) 20:00, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed mention of gigabit here. ~Kvng (talk) 17:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does this page just duplicate other pages?[edit]

There's already a gigabit Ethernet page giving details of gigabit Ethernet physical layers, and the Fast Ethernet page should probably swallow the pages for the individual 100Mbit/second standards; this page doesn't even mention 10 gigabit Ethernet. Guy Harris 17:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably it is, though User:Oakad clearly did a nice job with it. It would probably be better to merge the respective wording and tables onto the Fast Ethernet and gigabit Ethernet and the not-yet existant early/ancient/original/10mbs ethernet pages. -- KelleyCook 18:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged stuff from here into Fast Ethernet, and turned the "Fast Ethernet" section of this page into a summary that points to the Fast Ethernet page. I'll look at doing the same with the Gigabit Ethernet stuff.

The Varieties of Ethernet page also has a summary of various Ethernet physical layers; should the two pages be merged? Guy Harris 21:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I've done that merge. Guy Harris 08:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does this overlap with Ethernet over twisted pair. --Boscobiscotti 04:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC) I also added a link to [[autonegotiation]--Boscobiscotti 05:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there is a fair amount of overlap between Ethernet articles but it is managable. Feel free to suggest any organizational improvements. Ethernet physical layer#Twisted-pair cable is a WP:SUMMARY of Ethernet over twisted pair. ~Kvng (talk) 17:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Informal tone[edit]

Good tone now ~Kvng (talk) 20:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The minimum cable length section has stuff like "This is normally 10-100 Mb stuff" and "So here's where it gets interesting". Doesn't sound like something I'd read in an encyclopedia.

Tagging for informal tone. 59.154.26.124 23:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

10x steps between revisions[edit]

I think this article would be the right place to answer an old question of mine: what motivates the exponential speed increase of 10x between each revision? Why can't we have 25 Mbps or 450 Mbps Ethernet? Exxos77 18:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Economics and a pleasing sense of symmetry, I guess. For installed base, there's not much point in junking all your installed equipment for a 2.5x speedup. Generally speaking, the IEEE Task Forces have been given the job of creating the next Ethernet standard at 10x the speed but only 3x the cost. Having said that, IEEE are currently working on a 40Gbps Ethernet standard, so there goes the progression. It's not really encyclopaedic data, though, I think. Gareth8118 (talk) 13:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ethernet speed improvements have been exponential similar to Moore's law (see Edholm's law) so the multiplier is the same if the standard is updated at regular interval. ~Kvng (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]