• SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Cat5? Not even Cat5e? You sure the problem isn’t just that their connection is 10Mbps or worse and we sites aren’t just taking a couple minutes to load?

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Yeah, e. Just didn’t bother with the variance. Though, could even be Cat6 for all I know, never looked.

      Almost just said Cat but figured that may confuse people. Our engineers keeping the network purring like a kitty.

    • The_Decryptor@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Well if they’re only getting 10Mbps over Cat5 then the cable’s busted, since normally they’re rated for 2.5GbE.

      • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Nope, Cat5 was nominally rated for 100 MHz, but was superseded by Cat5e for greater reliability at such speeds

        • The_Decryptor@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          The Category 5e specification improves upon the Category 5 specification by further mitigating crosstalk. The bandwidth (100 MHz) and physical construction are the same between the two, and most Cat 5 cables actually happen to meet Cat 5e specifications even though they are not certified as such.

          I did kinda mean it as a joke originally, but yeah 5/5e are the same outside of crosstalk resistance.