nanog mailing list archives
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:38:43 -0500 (EST)
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Michael Thomas wrote:
I was looking at a Raspberry Pi board and was struck with how large the ethernetconnector is in comparison to the board as a whole. It strikes me: ethernetconnectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. Every othercable has changed several times in that time frame. I imaging that if anybodycared, ethernet cables could be many times smaller. Looking at wiring closets,etc, it seems like it might be a big win for density too.
I've you've ever seen a truly 'dense' wiring closet, they are plenty dense already - dense enough that unplugging a single patch cable in a rack jammed full of switches is already a bit of a chore.
So why, oh why, nanog the omniscient do we still use rj45's?
Inertia, for one thing. By that, I mean: 1. There hasn't been any real incentive to make the connectors smaller.2. The installed base of copper Ethernet ports dwarfs pretty much anything except maybe POTS lines, and even there, different countries sometimes adopted their own standards. The costs of having to make physical changes to even a small portion of the installed cable plant would be unjustifiably prohibitive.
There could also be some valid technical reasons:1. The conductors really can't get any thinner. In fact, with Cat6A, they're somewhat thicker than Cat5E. 2. I would also think that the conductors/pins really can't get much closer together inside the connector shell, without cross-talk becoming more of a problem. I don't have any technical data to back this up at the moment, but it seems reasonable. 3. If assertions 1 and 2 are true, then the cable really can't get any thinner either. Again, if you look at Cat6A cable (especially shielded Cat6A), it is significantly thicker than Cat5E.
jms
Current thread:
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?, (continued)
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Naslund, Steve (Dec 21)
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Naslund, Steve (Dec 21)
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Brandt, Ralph (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Gary Buhrmaster (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Andrew Gallo (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? William Herrin (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Michael Thomas (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Lyndon Nerenberg (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? William Herrin (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? William Herrin (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Michael Thomas (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Justin M. Streiner (Dec 20)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Deepak Jain (Dec 20)
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Matthew Black (Dec 21)
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Matthew Black (Dec 21)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Brielle Bruns (Dec 21)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? eric clark (Dec 21)
- Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? William Herrin (Dec 21)
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? (Ramdom thoughts) Brandt, Ralph (Dec 21)
- RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Matthew Black (Dec 21)