Cabling - Long Runs - Individual runs vs. using a switch

[sevendustweb]

Hello:

This is likely a rookie question, but I have to ask it:

I am opening a restaurant and need to run CAT 6 to several areas where POS terminals and VOIP telephones are located. Each of my runs will terminate in a central location.

For longer runs, I have seen people run one (1) CAT 6 wire (with a second wire as backup) to an area further away from the patch panel. The CAT 6 plugs into a switch. The various POS, VOIP phones and anything else needing an IP address are plugged into the switch. Clearly, in this example, if the CAT 6 fails, you only have one backup. Also, when it fails, everything connected to it loses connection with the rest of the network.

My question is this: Is it better to make tons of individual runs, or is it better to take the above-referenced approach and add a few more backup CATT 6 runs?

Thanks.

 

[coxhaus]

Home runs are the best. That being said you can use a switch to save money but I would not go over three switches deep. The other thing to think about is you may need switches which support VOIP for your phones which are not a cheap switch. I would check with your VOIP phone provider. So it comes down to making a decision you will live with for a long time.

You can probably get away with CAT 5e vs CAT 6 if it will save money. How long are your runs? As long as you are around 300 feet you will be good to go for the cable runs. If you need to go over 300 feet you may need a switch to use as a repeater or go with a fiber run. You need to compare prices and whether your core switch will support fiber modules.

 

[System Error Message]

To use multiple cables you either have to manually plug/unplug them or use a switch that supports a modern form of STP/failover.
Ethernet cables are rated for their speeds up to 100meters but when you go beyond that the speed does degrade.

 

[thiggins]

It's not just a question of cable failure (unlikely), but bandwidth. Each cable can carry 1 Gbps of traffic in each direction. If you have a lot of bandwidth hungry devices connected to that cable via a switch, you'll saturate the link.

 

[azazel1024]

The link saturation issue. If that isn't actually an issue, than saving the cost of all of the cabling and making the pull easier may make sense. Downside is you are possibly bottlenecking yourself for the future.

 

[gatorback]

If the real-estate is yours, then make the investment, otherwise, have you considered wireless access points strategically placed throughout the building? Wifi is nice if the building is already built and it is difficult problematic to wire-up. If the primary purpose of the network is POS transactions and VOIP, then wifi should provide enough bandwidth.

On the otherhand, if the building is being renovated / built (it lends itself to easy wiring) then my preference is for wiring over wifi.

As for the original question, I would keep it simple as possible, which you are in the best position to determine.

 

[Mokers]

This highly depends on how long your runs will be. If your runs are going to be within 75 meters or so, then I would say just stick with CAT5e or CAT6 all the way. If you are going longer than that, you can invest in some fiber SFPs. Even the low-end enterprise switches usually come with some generic SFP ports. The fiber runs will be more costly than regular ethernet, but you really want to avoid using switches just to extend the length of your ethernet runs.

Overall it also depends on how many devices you have on your network. If you have a POS and VOIP phone at several locations, then I would just do several runs to each location from your server room/MDF. If there are two devices, pull four cables. Don't use one cable plus a switch. This also makes it easier if you want to separate out the network and for example use a separate switch for voice and data in the server room. Reduces the amount of Layer 3 stuff you have to do to keep the traffic separated and you won't need to worry about QoS on multiple switches.

Unless you have a gigantic space, I would run as much stuff from your MDF as possible, but if there are places that make it difficult to get to that MDF, you can place an IDF in another area of the building and terminate some additional cable there. In retail, I think GB should be good enough.

 

[Alan Harvey]

You might be better getting a Switch that can handle 2 up-links also might not be bad if those fail to install WiFi card in The POS so they can still talk on a wireless router in which is setup for Radius or WPA-2 Enterprise

 

[Lee Sharp]

From a professional standpoint, what you are talking about is MDF/IDF for distribution. The MDF (main distribution frame) is the "server room" and a selection of home runs. The IDFs (intermediate distribution frame) are the satalite racks. Theyt are put in place due to distance, or problems with the mas of cabling needed to go back to the MDF. Commonly, they are connected back to the MDF via fiber.

All that stuff is expensive and complex. If you can do home runs, DO IT!

 

[coxhaus]

It is not stated whether this is an single owned building or a building complex. Usually the phone company will only deliver their services to the MDF of the building. If it is a building complex the MDF may be a shared area. You may be required to use an IDF. The IDF would be an extra cost for the phone company to deliver services. Security also plays a part in the setup. Using an IDF will usually shorten your cable runs as the IDF is located your area and the MDF may not be the best place to make cable runs from. More details will need to be given.

 

[ekhoo]

I would also prefer home runs but if the distance is large than probably you could have a remote switch connected via 2 or more 1Gbps links. Just deployed a 2 building network where switches are linked via fiber (220m apart) 2x1Gbps and internally, I've switches on each floor connected via 3x1gbps CAT6. The cost of having 1x10Gbps fiber was quite prohibitive but we did pull a 16-core single core fiber between blocks so we could eventually have more connections for bandwidth reasons.