29
Category 6A UTP vs. FTP Nathan Benton, RCDD/NTS/WD Technical Manager

Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Category 6A UTP vs. FTP

Nathan Benton, RCDD/NTS/WDTechnical Manager

Page 2: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

UTP vs. FTP

• Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s– UTP and FTP

• Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT)

• ANEXT Mitigation Methods

• Standards ApproachVictim

Page 3: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1Data RateMax DistanceCable SizeANEXT TestingShared PathwaysTraining

Page 4: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Standards Compliance

• TIA-568-C.1 Commercial Building Telecommunications Cabling Standard

• Ratified Feb 2008

• Available Now on TIA Website– http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/catalog/search.

cfm

Page 5: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

TIA-568-C.1 Commercial Building Telecommunications Cabling StandardTo incorporate• ANSI/TIA/EIA-568-B.1-4, Addendum 4 – Recognition of Category 6 and 850 nm Laser-

Optimized 50/125 Multimode Optical Fiber Cabling• ANSI/TIA/EIA-568-B.1-5, Addendum 5 – Telecommunications Cabling for

Telecommunications Enclosures

Highlights of technical changes from the previous edition• Removal of generic requirements which are now placed within ANSI/TIA-568-C.0• Removal of 150-Ohm STP cabling• Removal of Category 5 cabling• Incorporation of references to generic nomenclature found in ANSI/TIA-568-C.0• Inclusion of Category 6 and Augmented Category 6 balanced 100-ohm cabling• Inclusion of 850 nm laser-optimized 50/125 um multimode optical fiber cabling• Inclusion of Telecommunications Enclosures• Removal of balanced twisted-pair cabling performance and test requirements which are

now placed within ANSI/TIA-568-C.2• Centralized cabling incorporated into main body of document • Removal of 50-ohm and 75-ohm coaxial cabling

Page 6: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

UTP-vs-FTP Selection Matrix

YESYES Meet Class A Emission requirements

YES

NO(YES if in metal containment)

Meet immunity requirements per IEC/EN 61000-6-2 (Heavy Industrial environments)

YES

YES Meet immunity requirements per IEC CISPR 24, EN 55024 and IEC/EN 61000-6-1 (Office environments)

YESYES Meet or exceed TIA Category 6A channel specifications (up to 4-connection channel)

YESYES Meet or exceed ISO/IEC Class EA channel specifications (up to 4-connection channel)

YESYES Support 10GBASE-T to 100 meters (up to 4-connection channel)

X10D FTPX10D UTPCustomer Requirements Generic Cat 6A FTP

YES

YES

YES

YES

NO

YES

Must meet TIA-568-C.1

Page 7: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1 Compliant CompliantData RateMax DistanceCable SizeANEXT TestingShared PathwaysTraining

Page 8: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Data Rates

• Standard written around 10Gb/s• Category 6A Added to Standard• Backwards Compatible with Cat6 and Cat5e• Category 5e removed from standard

• IEEE 802.11an Standard• 10Gb/s over installed base of Category 6

– May Require Mitigation

Page 9: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

10GBASE-T Power ProjectionTechnology Improvements Reduce Power Needs

2006-7 2007-8 2008-9

TN1010

130nm10W

TN2020

5W

TN3030

3WTeranetics TeraPHY®

Source: Linley Group Conference May 2007

• Intel Penryn Processor (45 nm technology) available November 2007• 32 nm technology processors available in 2009• Each improvement reduces power 30-40%

Page 10: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1 Compliant CompliantData Rate 10 Gb/s 10Gb/sMax DistanceCable SizeANEXT TestingShared PathwaysTraining

Page 11: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Maximum Distance

• 100 Meters Channel• Specifies a 4 Connector Model

• IEEE 802.11an Standard• 10Gb/s over installed base of Category 6

– 37 Meters– May Require Mitigation

Page 12: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Performance of Channel vs. Components

• Be careful of Cable test measurements that exceed the TIA568.B.2 - 250 MHz frequency sweep

– 600 MHz frequency is not achievable in a field channel

• When comparing performance specifications it is important to view the entire channel

• Ensure manufacturer is warranting the entire channel not just the components they manufacture

91A Series Cable

SYSTIMAX M3600 w/ MGS500

GS10E CordGS10E Cord

SYSTIMAX M3600 w/ MGS500 MGS500MGS500

GS10E CordGS10E Cord

3 6 1 2 3 6 1 2

Lucent PATCHMAX Lucent PATCHMAX

Page 13: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Verified Support of 10G6@1 100m 4-conn Channel

Page 14: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1 Compliant CompliantData Rate 10 Gb/s 10Gb/sMax Distance 100 meters 100 metersCable SizeANEXT TestingShared PathwaysTraining

Page 15: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Cable Diameter

• TIA-568-C.1 Specifes maximum cable diameter of .354 inches O.D.

• Specified for both UTP and FTP• Typical UTP O.D. .30 in to .33 in

– New UTP introduction of .285 in• Typical FTP O.D. .290 in

• 6 around 1 configuration

Page 16: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Conduit Fill Ratio

Size AcondFTP OD

UTP OD

A-FTP

A-UTP

40% Fill UTP

40%Fill FTP

0.5 0.20 0.29 0.31 0.07 0.08 1.04 1.19

0.75 0.44 0.29 0.31 0.07 0.08 2.34 2.68

1.00 0.79 0.29 0.31 0.07 0.08 4.16 4.76

1.25 1.23 0.29 0.31 0.07 0.08 6.50 7.43

1.50 1.77 0.29 0.31 0.07 0.08 9.37 10.70

* Plenum Cable used in this illustration

Page 17: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

1.24”

2.3”

Single gang boxes are not large enoughto maintain proper bend radius.

– UTP – 4x Outside Diameter of the Cable– FTP – 8x Outside Diameter of the Cable

CAT6A FTPCAT6A UTP

Cable Diameter

Page 18: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1 Compliant CompliantData Rate 10 Gb/s 10Gb/sMax Distance 100 meters 100 metersCable Size .285 in O.D. .290 in O.D.ANEXT TestingShared PathwaysTraining

Page 19: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Large bundles common in Data Centers

Alien NEXT

The signal strength of non-adjacent cables is simply too weak to induce Alien Crosstalk

Cable geometry dictates the total number of cables with Alien Crosstalk effect on a single cable is SIX (6)

Page 20: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Example of 6 around 1 ConfigurationTest Equipment Setup

Measuring AlienCrosstalk

Page 21: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

FIELD TESTING

• Field Testing is NOT specified in the Standards for UTP or FTP – it is an option.

• Most UTP manufacturers do not require ANEXT testing to warranty system

• To ensure meeting quality metrics both UTP and FTP should be tested.

• FTP Shield continuity testing

Page 22: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1 Compliant CompliantData Rate 10 Gb/s 10Gb/sMax Distance 100 meters 100 metersCable Size .285 in O.D. .290 in O.D.ANEXT Testing Not Required* Not Required*Shared PathwayExperience

Page 23: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Shared Cable Pathways

• TIA-568-B.2-10 E.4 Test Configurations“Alien Cross-talk requirements for category 6A channels and permanent links are specified for bundled configurations containing only category 6A cabling requirements”

• Manufacturers publish specific installation guidelines for various situations

Page 24: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

• Separation of Cat6A UTP cabling from lower categories is an issue if the lower categories are supporting 10G. For all other applications there is no issue.

• Typical Cabling Requirements

• Cable types are laid, routed, and/or bundled in separate groups• Pull each cable type separately• Cables can be layered but not intermingled • If alternate pulling of each cable type is planned, then side by side

positions in the tray must be allocated for each cable type

Shared Cable Pathways

Page 25: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1 Compliant CompliantData Rate 10 Gb/s 10Gb/sMax Distance 100 meters 100 metersCable Size .285 in O.D. .290 in O.D.ANEXT Testing Not Required* Not Required*

Shared PathwayStd. Bundling/ Layering Std. Bundling

Experience

Page 26: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Structured Cabling Questionnaire

Question Answer

1 What percentage of installations over the past 3 years have been FTP / STP (non-UTP) ?

2 What percentage of installations over the last 3 years have been UTP?

3 How many installation projects have you done in hospital environments in the last 3 years?

4 How many of these hospital projects utilized FTP / STP solutions?

5Have your Technicians received independent training for FTP /STP Solutions (BICSI, Global Knowledge, NJATC, etc) ?

6 If Yes, what percentage of technicians received training?

7 Have your Technicians received vendor specific training for FTP / STP solutions?

8 If Yes, what percentage of technicians received training?

9Have your Technicians received independent training for UTP Solutions (BICSI, Global Knowledge, NJATC, etc) ?

10 If Yes, what percentage of technicians received training?

11 Have your Technicians received vendor specific training for UTP solutions?

12 If Yes, what percentage of technicians received training?

13 What percentage of current inventory consists of FTP / STP components?

14 What percentage of current inventory consists of UTP components?

Installation Experience

Page 27: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Installation Experience

FTP v. UTP Installations

1%

99%

1 2

Non-Vendor FTP Training

6%

94%

Received

Vendor-Specific FTP Training

9%

91%

Received

Percentage of Inventory

0%

100%

FTP

Page 28: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Comparison Chart

6A UTP 6A FTPParameterTIA-568-C.1 Compliant CompliantData Rate 10 Gb/s 10Gb/sMax Distance 100 meters 100 metersCable Size .285 in O.D. .290 in O.D.ANEXT Testing Not Required* Not Required*

Shared PathwayStd. Bundling/ Layering Std. Bundling

Experience84% Worldwide

16% Worldwide

Page 29: Category 6A UTP vs. FTP - BICSI Benton.pdf · UTP vs. FTP • Two copper solutions for 10Gb/s – UTP and FTP • Effects of Alien Crosstalk (ANEXT) • ANEXT Mitigation Methods •

Thank you

Brought to you by

Nathan Benton, RCDD/NTS/WDTechnical Manager, NAR Enterprise Solutions

[email protected]