There have been a lot of threads about maximum distance lately and also posts in existing threads discussing this issue. Now everyone seems to state 100 meters. But I was thinking about this and decided to do a little investigation.
The reason for this is a situation where the 'final destination' of the video signal would be much more than 100 meters from the cam. So I was trying to understand the 100 meter rule. Is that the total distance from cam to NVR (or BI PC)? Or is that the distance between one piece of networking equipment to the next?
I was thinking that I could put a few cams in an area and they would be connected to a POE switch. Call that a 'satellite group'. Those runs maybe 30-40 meters from each cam to the satellite POE switch. Then run an ethernet cable from that satellite switch to a second switch that is in a central location 100 meters from the satellite POE switch. Call that the 'central switch'. The install might need three or four of these satellite groups all running back to the central switch. From that central switch to the NVR/BI PC is maybe 5 meters. So a total max distance from cam to NVR would be about 145 meters. But the maximum distance from one switch to another would be 100 meters.
So in researching this I found some posts on the Cisco Community where back in 2015 someone asked a question very similar to this. About every answer to the post stated that the 100 meter max is between switches, not the full path. Now it gets interesting due to a 'late post' from September 2019 (4 years after the last post in the thread), cut and pasted below:
The 100M limitation is dated information. Back when we used hub and only had half-duplex. Because of half-duplex, you had to transmit and receive on the same wire. The 100M distance was a restriction because that was the amount of time took for the packet to be physically transmitted and arrive on the remote side of the cable to avoid collisions before the remote side to transmit.
If you use full-duplex, which we should be by now (even when this was posted in 2015)... you can easily get 500 feet from Cat5/6. We do this every day with brand spankin' new Cisco APs (which run over POE).
Also, a patch panel is not a repeater unless there is something in the patch panel electronically retransmitting the packet (repeater)
Sorry for the late arrival but I was looking for something to quote for this same topic and found this incorrect answer.
So I do not have the networking knowledge/experience to know if this is correct or not. Can anyone with the appropriate knowledge/background give their viewpoint on this?
P.S. the comment WRT "a patch panel is not a repeater" was in reference to someone stating "good patch panels can act as repeaters as well to regenerate layer 1 signals breaking the 100m issue". in the tread.
The reason for this is a situation where the 'final destination' of the video signal would be much more than 100 meters from the cam. So I was trying to understand the 100 meter rule. Is that the total distance from cam to NVR (or BI PC)? Or is that the distance between one piece of networking equipment to the next?
I was thinking that I could put a few cams in an area and they would be connected to a POE switch. Call that a 'satellite group'. Those runs maybe 30-40 meters from each cam to the satellite POE switch. Then run an ethernet cable from that satellite switch to a second switch that is in a central location 100 meters from the satellite POE switch. Call that the 'central switch'. The install might need three or four of these satellite groups all running back to the central switch. From that central switch to the NVR/BI PC is maybe 5 meters. So a total max distance from cam to NVR would be about 145 meters. But the maximum distance from one switch to another would be 100 meters.
So in researching this I found some posts on the Cisco Community where back in 2015 someone asked a question very similar to this. About every answer to the post stated that the 100 meter max is between switches, not the full path. Now it gets interesting due to a 'late post' from September 2019 (4 years after the last post in the thread), cut and pasted below:
The 100M limitation is dated information. Back when we used hub and only had half-duplex. Because of half-duplex, you had to transmit and receive on the same wire. The 100M distance was a restriction because that was the amount of time took for the packet to be physically transmitted and arrive on the remote side of the cable to avoid collisions before the remote side to transmit.
If you use full-duplex, which we should be by now (even when this was posted in 2015)... you can easily get 500 feet from Cat5/6. We do this every day with brand spankin' new Cisco APs (which run over POE).
Also, a patch panel is not a repeater unless there is something in the patch panel electronically retransmitting the packet (repeater)
Sorry for the late arrival but I was looking for something to quote for this same topic and found this incorrect answer.
So I do not have the networking knowledge/experience to know if this is correct or not. Can anyone with the appropriate knowledge/background give their viewpoint on this?
P.S. the comment WRT "a patch panel is not a repeater" was in reference to someone stating "good patch panels can act as repeaters as well to regenerate layer 1 signals breaking the 100m issue". in the tread.