There's a video here http://www.cableorganizer.com/articles/cat5-cat5e-ca...

There is no plug on the end, just a flying lead that is cut to length and punched into the A & B terminals on the filter.

Lucky [censored], obviously has some of the old school extension kit sockets on board.

Now having to use a 'normal' NTE back box, and then fit and RJ45 front plate on it, just terminating the single pair on 4 and 5. The end that terminates by the NTE is supposed to have an RJ11 fitted by the engineer, this then going in to the frontplate filter on the 'usual' hole. The reasoning being that the punters can then, if required, choose to plug the modem in direct, bypass the kit, if they wish, or to aid faulting. Remember, these kits, once installed, belong to the punter.

However, fitting the RJ11's is a fiddly PITA, terminating on the internal IDC's is much neater also ..... so.

As for the contractors fitting them ....... but that would take time, and a little skill, two things they seem short of, or loathe to dispense.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

Lucky [censored], obviously has some of the old school extension kit sockets on board.

Now having to use a 'normal' NTE back box, and then fit and RJ45 front plate on it, just terminating the single pair on 4 and 5. The end that terminates by the NTE is supposed to have an RJ11 fitted by the engineer, this then going in to the frontplate filter on the 'usual' hole. The reasoning being that the punters can then, if required, choose to plug the modem in direct, bypass the kit, if they wish, or to aid faulting. Remember, these kits, once installed, belong to the punter.

However, fitting the RJ11's is a fiddly PITA, terminating on the internal IDC's is much neater also ..... so.

As for the contractors fitting them ....... but that would take time, and a little skill, two things they seem short of, or loathe to dispense.

Any idea why it has changed to an RJ45? Most modem leads are RJ11 or RJ14, which will fit but are not always secure and you can get an intermittent connection.

Old set up was master socket in kitchen at back of building, which fed an extension box in lobby around 6 mtrs away, then from lobby box extension to router in living room was using standard telephone extension cable running approx 20 mtrs to the router.

BTO engineer replaced lobby extension box with little junction box then ran cat5 cable from lobby to living room where he placed the new master socket & BT Modem.

Not exactly the way I expected he would do it but all in all very pleased with the install. Only problem now is getting 80/20 sync (107 attainable) but only seeing throughput around 40 to 50Mb (wired connection measured against various speed tests, test files & premium newsgroups).

Wondering if the 10 day training only affects sync or throughput as well? Poor throughput seems to be a known but random issue on some Sky connections it would seem.

Sounds like you got a proper job done, which quite a few people haven't recently.

I believe Sky use a similar system to what they do on ADSL2+, where they start you at 4Mbps then ramp you up in stages over a few days. I think I have seen it said they start you on a 40Mbps throughput cap and ramp that up in the same way.

Any idea why it has changed to an RJ45?

They had shed loads of 'em in Magna Park, at a guess.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

Any idea why it has changed to an RJ45?

They had shed loads of 'em in Magna Park, at a guess.

Don't they ever think these things through ...

How many complaints or CS calls will there be when a customer plugs their PC network cable or the router WAN network cable into the RJ45? When there was a RJ11/14 it was different. Also, there is a "standard" whereby RJ45s are for network cables (Ethernet or others) and RJ11/14 for telephony/analog/raw data/voice.