1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. COMP.SYS.IBM.PS2.HARDWARE

  • On the Difference Twinax and Cat6 UTP 10 Gigabit Ethernet

    From Louis Ohland@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 2 14:54:45 2021
    Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...

    https://etherealmind.com/difference-twinax-category-6-10-gigabit-ethernet/

    "Why Twinax

    The twinax cable uses a different signal propagation method, my
    understanding is that it’s more like a radio wave than an electrical
    signal. A UTP signal needs a lot of electronics to drive generate and
    receive the signal.

    The end result is that Twinax uses much less power (something around 1 –
    1.5W per port) compared to UTP (4 – 6 W per port). When you have a lot
    of ports this power consumption can be significant factor in design.

    You can see this in Cisco UCS designs where it is recommended to use the
    Twinax cables from the server to the Nexus 5000 switch as a server to
    Top of Rack cabling solution (not entirely unlike Infiniband). Of
    course, your connections from the Nexus 5K to the network core are
    likely to fibre or UTP since the maximum distance of the twinax solution
    is only 10 metres. "

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Grant Taylor@21:1/5 to Louis Ohland on Tue Nov 2 15:13:58 2021
    On 11/2/21 1:54 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
    Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...

    It depends how you look at it.

    "Twinax" as a proper name for something IBM used in the past is long dead.

    "twinax" as a technology of twin-axial connection in an outer shield is
    quite alive. It keeps re-appearing every few years as a higher quality
    way to get signals from one location to another.

    Another common approach is to use a pair of coax cables with different
    signals in each coax. DS-3s were famous for this in the '90s.



    --
    Grant. . . .
    unix || die

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tomas Slavotinek@21:1/5 to Grant Taylor on Tue Nov 2 22:32:42 2021
    Exactly. If anything, twinax is getting more and more popular in today's
    world of high-speed serial connections. For example SATA uses a form of
    twinax cabling as well...

    On 2.11.2021 22:13, Grant Taylor wrote:
    On 11/2/21 1:54 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
    Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...

    It depends how you look at it.

    "Twinax" as a proper name for something IBM used in the past is long dead.

    "twinax" as a technology of twin-axial connection in an outer shield is
    quite alive.  It keeps re-appearing every few years as a higher quality
    way to get signals from one location to another.

    Another common approach is to use a pair of coax cables with different signals in each coax.  DS-3s were famous for this in the '90s.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From IBMMuseum@21:1/5 to Grant Taylor on Tue Nov 2 14:32:56 2021
    On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 at 3:13:59 PM UTC-6, Grant Taylor wrote:
    On 11/2/21 1:54 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
    Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...
    It depends how you look at it.

    "Twinax" as a proper name for something IBM used in the past is long dead.

    "twinax" as a technology of twin-axial connection in an outer shield is
    quite alive. It keeps re-appearing every few years as a higher quality
    way to get signals from one location to another.

    Another common approach is to use a pair of coax cables with different signals in each coax. DS-3s were famous for this in the '90s.



    --
    Grant. . . .
    unix || die

    Correct, modern usage is as an SFP module connection - Wikipedia has a good article contrasting between the two: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinaxial_cabling

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From IBMMuseum@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 2 14:45:57 2021
    Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...
    It depends how you look at it.

    "Twinax" as a proper name for something IBM used in the past is long dead.

    "twinax" as a technology of twin-axial connection in an outer shield is quite alive. It keeps re-appearing every few years as a higher quality
    way to get signals from one location to another.

    Another common approach is to use a pair of coax cables with different signals in each coax. DS-3s were famous for this in the '90s.

    Our OC-3s were fiber with a co-ax connection header - but in pairs for duplexing - I even have a couple Cisco OC-3 boards around. I trunk VLANs over my home network using multi-mode fiber to SFP modules in my switches - that is supposed to be 4Gbps links
    - the "twin-ax" modules are probably too new for my equipment to use.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)