Is a home fibre network madness?

I don't know what's needed or how much it cost but a brief look at Cable Monkey suggests fibre isn't too expensive. But I have no idea what's needed or if its too early to consider fibre in the home.

Why? Cos I want to relocate a NAS to a different part of the house. There's no network there so I'm going to have to run some cables. If I'm running Ethernet inside walls I'm going to run two or three as that's easier than doing it all over again in the future. But what if I can future proof by running a single fibre?

Obvs, my network is currently gigabit Ethernet running on Cat 5e. So what would I need to convert that into light, send it around the house and turn in back into Ethernet for the NAS?

Or is this just madness?

[Edit for typo]

Edited by Woolwich (Thu 04-Feb-21 11:46:17)

Not madness, its how we link different rooms in data centres. (nowadays with faster than 1 Gig). For a small project such as that, you would need two media converters, and some multi mode fibre. Each converter needs power.

This would be the same as running a single Cat6 cable, but easier to run outside etc. If you wanted to replace multiple Ethernet connections it depends if you need more than 1Gig across the link, or if you would install a switch at each end. If you wanted the fibre to replace multiple connections you would be into a lot more complexity.

Converters like this one, see the 6th picture down for an example of what you're trying to do.

Edited by jchamier (Thu 04-Feb-21 12:03:55)

Thanks, that's helpful.

Can you join fibre cable and connectors without expensive equipment or do you need to buy ready-made lengths? If I do this with Ethernet I'll run a cable through the walls and terminate it at each end with a wall mounted port which is easy enough to connect with a tool I have. Then I'd have short ready-made Ethernet cables from the port to the NAS and to the switch/router at the other end.

Maybe one day I'll have a 10G NAS, so I'd want to run a fibre capable. OTOH, the rest of existing network is only 1G so I'd need a 10G switch as well. Maybe that's starting to become mad?

You don't have to use fibre for a 10gbe network, you can of course use CAT6a and a 10gbe switch. I recently upgraded my home network to 10gbe, was a simple process as I had installed CAT6 to begin with. I just purchased a 10gbe switch (cost only £130) and a couple of network cards for my PC's (£25) each.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

You don't have to use fibre for a 10gbe network

But I thought it might be fun!

Then again Ethernet is passive: I wouldn't need a couple of convertors which require power. So perhaps a Cat6a cable (or two) is the sensible way to go. If I plug Cat6a into my current Cat5e network it should just act as if it was Cat5e cable?

I think it's pointless for a home network as you'll have to drop media converters everywhere, and pull pre-terminated cable unless you're going to invest in the tools to splice connectors on.

In reply to a post by jpm:

I think it's pointless for a home network as you'll have to drop media converters everywhere, and pull pre-terminated cable unless you're going to invest in the tools to splice connectors on.

I agree, unless you have to cross between buildings on different phases of mains electricity, or own Buckingham Palace

If you really want to make something as future proof as possible then pull in some blown fibre tubing at the same time as you pull in the Cat6 cable and be careful not to kink it.

In addition to the replies so far, my main concerns would be that

1) it is more fragile for much the same connectivity, and
2) until common devices come with SFP+ ports there is no speed to gain beyond 1Gbps

I have a hunch that system built-in NICs will start to support 2.5GbE before you are able to see a benefit from your fibre investment. And there are already multiple USB3/USB-C network adapters for multi-gigabit copper that you can try out.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B084L4JL9K/ (Plugable 2.5GbE with USB3+C connectors)

There are client devices out there already that do >1Gbps

For example many Macs can be specced with a 10Gbps NIC and there are plenty of higher end PC motherboards that now come with 2.5Gbps or better NICs.

Yes, I think it is mad. I'll run some Cat6e.

My Mac has ThunderSomething aka USB 3.confusing. I'm sure that does 5Gbps.

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

I don't know what's needed or how much it cost but a brief look at Cable Monkey suggests fibre isn't too expensive. But I have no idea what's needed or if its too early to consider fibre in the home.

Why? Cos I want to relocate a NAS to a different part of the house. There's no network there so I'm going to have to run some cables. If I'm running Ethernet inside walls I'm going to run two or three as that's easier than doing it all over again in the future. But what if I can future proof by running a single fibre?

Obvs, my network is currently gigabit Ethernet running on Cat 5e. So what would I need to convert that into light, send it around the house and turn in back into Ethernet for the NAS?

Or is this just madness?

[Edit for typo]

Without getting too personal, can you provide a quick summary of the layout of your house, floors distances etc, any external rooms or outhouses etc.

Depending on your house setup a mixture of copper and fibre could be appropriate and done properly will be cost effective and hopefully future proof.

Honestly I wouldn't bother - 1Gbps is plenty for many years in the future. It is more robust than fibre and considerably cheaper. I have just run Cat5e in my own house, including damaging walls etc. Fibre never even crossed my mind.

If you have a huge house and you're going to exceed 100m, then fair enough - even then I'd be considering just having 2x100m and a switch in the middle.

Thanks for the offer. Its not a big enough house to make this worthwhile. I'm starting to think although it might be fun, its not really necessary and Cat6a will be fine for the next few years.

Fair enough. Copper is totally fine for all the links to your end devices.

If you have long distances or want to have a "backbone" cable that run 10 Gbps and more in future (not as ridiculous as it sounds depending on your NAS needs) then its really not expensive at all.

For example a single core fibre cable, 50 metres, micro-armoured SWA that is more flexible than any Cat5e cable and only 3mm in diameter with FC connectors on the ends - will set you back around £30

You can get Gigabit fibre SFP pluggables for around £6 from Fibre Store. 10 Gbps SFP's pluggable are around £20. These need 2 fibre cores to work, but a 10 Gb/s BiDi SFP pluggable - just one fibre core needed for transmit/receive - is around £30

A little (4-port +1) 10 Gbps dual router /switch from MikroTik is about £90 before VAT. An 8-port 10 Gbps switch is £156.

Not dirt cheap, but not killer expensive either.

Edited by Pheasant (Thu 04-Feb-21 18:44:40)

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

For example a single core fibre cable, 50 metres, micro-armoured SWA that is more flexible than any Cat5e cable and only 3mm in diameter with FC connectors on the ends - will set you back around £30

You can get Gigabit fibre SFP pluggables for around £6 from Fibre Store. 10 Gbps SFP's pluggable are around £20. These need 2 fibre cores to work, but a 10 Gb/s BiDi SFP pluggable - just one fibre core needed for transmit/receive - is around £30

A little (4-port +1) 10 Gbps dual router /switch from MikroTik is about £90 before VAT. An 8-port 10 Gbps switch is £156.

Not dirt cheap, but not killer expensive either.

Breaking a long silence to say that this is basically how my home network is built.

10G BiDi, Mikrotik switches either side, 2 x 4+1 port for rooms with lower port requirements, 2 x 8+1 for the main switch to the ONT and my home office/lab.

I use Invisilight fibre and it does exactly what it says on the tin. Some attenuation, the optics are intended for 10 or 20km runs and mine are closer to 10 metres, and connector converters, the fibre is SC and you need LC, and I'm done.

This all feeds into a Mikrotik CCR2004 which is massively excessive but I was planning for the future - once and done.

I highly recommend it as a discrete, scalable solution. I'm good for 10G right now and could place a second fibre next to the original one, put the ports into a LAG and have 20G, with the router having 25G ports and 40G routing capability without changing any of the hardware, or relegate the switches to edge and use 40G when the time comes - the fibre itself can carry terabits.

Edited by CarlTSpeak (Fri 05-Feb-21 10:50:38)

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

Or is this just madness?

Yes it's complete madness. Just run Cat 6a and your good to go for 10Gb ethernet.

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

Maybe one day I'll have a 10G NAS, so I'd want to run a fibre capable. OTOH, the rest of existing network is only 1G so I'd need a 10G switch as well. Maybe that's starting to become mad?

Given that 10Gbps Ethernet runs just fine over Cat 6a then why do you need fibre to run a 10Gbps NAS?

I deal with fibre all the time at work, but the chances of me using it at home anytime soon are basically zero. Especially as my home network is Cat 6a.

You could save yourself some money by using Cat 5e euro modules now and swapping them out for Cat 6a as and when needed. I went full in and did everything with Cat 6a modules but I did get the cable and patch panels for free (came from work completely legitimately as stuff that was otherwise going to be thrown out).

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

Honestly I wouldn't bother - 1Gbps is plenty for many years in the future. It is more robust than fibre and considerably cheaper. I have just run Cat5e in my own house, including damaging walls etc. Fibre never even crossed my mind.

If you have a huge house and you're going to exceed 100m, then fair enough - even then I'd be considering just having 2x100m and a switch in the middle.

I would strongly recommend not running Cat5e. If you have any sort of home NAS then it is not enough in the near future. The marginal additional cost of going to Cat6a cable and future proofing yourself to 10GbE is well worth it, even if you save yourself some money and fit Cat5e face plates which are a lot cheaper than Cat6a ones. It's much easier to swap out the face plates than replace the cable, which will require lifting flooring etc. as opposed to screwing off a faceplate puching down a new module and screwing it back on the wall.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

Given that 10Gbps Ethernet runs just fine over Cat 6a then why do you need fibre to run a 10Gbps NAS?

Cos by the time I get a 10G NAS Ethernet will probably be out of fashion and when I pop up here in n years time asking everyone will point and laugh and ask why I didn't run fibre in the first place.

But, yes, Cat6a is the sensible route.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

I would strongly recommend not running Cat5e.

Can you come back three years ago and offer that advice please! Unfortunately I asked the builder to run "Cat 5/6" and they ran Cat 5e. The cables they ran are embedded in the fabric of the house, any upgrading would require a lot of work. So I don't want to make the same mistake as I extend the network to relocate my NAS.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

Maybe one day I'll have a 10G NAS, so I'd want to run a fibre capable. OTOH, the rest of existing network is only 1G so I'd need a 10G switch as well. Maybe that's starting to become mad?

Given that 10Gbps Ethernet runs just fine over Cat 6a then why do you need fibre to run a 10Gbps NAS?

I deal with fibre all the time at work, but the chances of me using it at home anytime soon are basically zero. Especially as my home network is Cat 6a.

You could save yourself some money by using Cat 5e euro modules now and swapping them out for Cat 6a as and when needed. I went full in and did everything with Cat 6a modules but I did get the cable and patch panels for free (came from work completely legitimately as stuff that was otherwise going to be thrown out).

Cost per port on 10Gb/s on fibre is less than half the cost on copper. Even for a handful of ports. Then the cabling itself is superior and actually cheaper too - especially if you are doing the copper properly and you need to included jacks/faceplates and termination time/cost.

For switch to switch interconnects @ 10 Gbps - even in the home - fibre makes a lot of sense. Actually a heck of a lot more than copper.

Saying that however, running copper to the edge / end user devices though I agree is still the way to go and will be for a while yet.

Something I've found is that 10GBase-T modules run really, really hot. As in you can't touch then for any length of time hot.

Took out the 10GBase-T module that was going to a wireless AP and replaced it with a 2 x 1G LAG. Meant the chassis was cooler and I could remove the external fan that I had there for the sole purpose of cooling that module.

Are these the MikroTik branded 10GBase-T modules (S+RJ10)? I have a couple of these on order, as I need a module that can scale down to 10BaseT (yes Meg!) half duplex on the host switch and the MikroTik's do that as well as run all the way up to full 10G - they are the only 6-speed copper modules I seem to be able to find.

I wonder if the (cable link) length influences the temperature of the 10GBase-T SFP+ module - fs.com sell two varieties of SFP+ based 10GBase-T modules - an up to 30 metre version same as the MikroTik and a slightly more expensive version that will run 10G up to 80 metres.

In my setups, 10GBase-T copper here runs off native (also PoE+) enabled ports on a Netgear 4300 series switch - this is modular and fan cooled beast, so haven't really paid much attention to the module temps.

At the moment for copper based 10G, I've only our laptop Thunderbolt based docks which happily run 10GBase-T - although these are fan assisted!

The baby MikroTik's switches have either 1G SFP or 10G fibre SFP+ modules mostly

In reply to a post by CarlTSpeak:

Something I've found is that 10GBase-T modules run really, really hot. As in you can't touch then for any length of time hot.

This is my experience too.

I have tried the Mikrotik S+RJ10, it performed as expected but even on 25m of Cat6 it generates enough heat to run up the fans in a CRS328-24P-4S+ to a high level. As a result I have retired it in favour of fibre.

If you need 10G around the home, heat, noise and cost are usually reduced if fibre is an option. You spend a few pounds more on the fibre, but the SFP+ is cheaper.

So one of my main reasons for wanting to move my RAID is that its in an unventilated cupboard. The router will have to stay there so it will be warm but cooler!

I'm swithering between Cat6 and fibre. I don't really want more components which need power, so best with Cat6. And now you're saying the fibre hardware creates a lot of heat!

Sounds like Cat6 for me then. Replacing one warm RAID with hot network convertors sounds like madness!

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

And now you're saying the fibre hardware creates a lot of heat!

No to be specific he's referring to the copper 10G pluggables which go into SFP+ cages. The 10G fibre pluggables that go into the same cages don't really generate any heat at all.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

And now you're saying the fibre hardware creates a lot of heat!

No to be specific he's referring to the copper 10G pluggables which go into SFP+ cages. The 10G fibre pluggables that go into the same cages don't really generate any heat at all.

Correct. The 10GBaseT module I had heat report from was 70C+ before I added extra cooling. The hottest 10G BiDi module I have is 37C in a chassis reporting 35C as system temperature, that system being fully loaded with SFPs and no external cooling.

The 10GBaseT modules use a ton of power and, hence, generate a ton of heat.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

Honestly I wouldn't bother - 1Gbps is plenty for many years in the future. It is more robust than fibre and considerably cheaper. I have just run Cat5e in my own house, including damaging walls etc. Fibre never even crossed my mind.

If you have a huge house and you're going to exceed 100m, then fair enough - even then I'd be considering just having 2x100m and a switch in the middle.

I would strongly recommend not running Cat5e. If you have any sort of home NAS then it is not enough in the near future. The marginal additional cost of going to Cat6a cable and future proofing yourself to 10GbE is well worth it, even if you save yourself some money and fit Cat5e face plates which are a lot cheaper than Cat6a ones. It's much easier to swap out the face plates than replace the cable, which will require lifting flooring etc. as opposed to screwing off a faceplate puching down a new module and screwing it back on the wall.

1Gbps is plenty. That is enough to transfer 1TB in under 3 hours. Plenty for streaming and backups. What home use case needs something faster than this?

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

Are these the MikroTik branded 10GBase-T modules (S+RJ10)? I have a couple of these on order, as I need a module that can scale down to 10BaseT (yes Meg!) half duplex on the host switch and the MikroTik's do that as well as run all the way up to full 10G - they are the only 6-speed copper modules I seem to be able to find.

Yes. Don't put them side by side in the chassis. Ideally have a blank slot either side of both of them

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

1Gbps is plenty. That is enough to transfer 1TB in under 3 hours. Plenty for streaming and backups. What home use case needs something faster than this?

Speed tests, my good man, speed tests.

https://www.speedtest.net/result/c/a86db62d-6ee8-41a...

You can run 10Gbps over Cat5e comfortably for around 45 metres.

Paul

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

1Gbps is plenty. That is enough to transfer 1TB in under 3 hours. Plenty for streaming and backups. What home use case needs something faster than this?

Not having to wait 3 hours!!

Only use cases at 'home' are for 2 reasons -

You have a server(s) and work at home and use them significantly in data transfer heavy tasks
You have 2 or more core hubs of your network - e.g. one Network switch covering one half the house, one covering other

All other use cases go Cat 6a, but if you have either of the above go fibre. Fibre is cheaper and easier, when you are linking switches and servers / workstations.

In reply to a post by paulg0:

You can run 10Gbps over Cat5e comfortably for around 45 metres.

Paul

Have you actually run 10G on Cat5e at this length? What make of cable (or cabling system)?

You’re really pushing at the absolute limits of the cable, even at shorter distances.

It may be possible in some cases but certainly won’t be universally true, given the wide range of quality of cabling (and terminations etc) - especially in the home environment - the great majority of installations won’t be performance tested.

I really wish I could easily embed images in this forum.

My use case is that the fibre is almost invisible and I haven't had to drill or put conduit anywhere.

You just wish to show off with a fast speed test then?

In reply to a post by broadband66:

You just wish to show off with a fast speed test then?

*Chuckle*

It's not really on-topic but as the joke was missed it seems but I'm a permanent home worker so a devoted business line is a good idea, and resiliency is important to this. Alongside this the specific nature of my work makes multiple lines a good idea. I've an LTE/4G gateway being added to the mix, again for work purposes.

The 10G was installed after a home move so that it could be a 'one and done' job, much like everything else being done with the home. The router these guys feed has 25G ports and is good for 40 Gbps of throughput so shouldn't need upgrade for a long time also, but either way the fibre can carry terabits so I can just replace the stuff either side.

The cash was available, the kit was available, the justification was available.

The actual post itself was a joke, but I trust that explains for anyone who took me seriously

It is a pain in the neck and if you have no hardware to take advantage of the extra speed then it is a waste of time and money. The cheapest switchis this one at just over £100 as far as I can tell, then you need transceivers and then the fibre.

i found this video on you Tube,that explains a bit about it and the prices, in the U.K, but the video is a couple of years old, so prices may have changed.

I got it working when I have done it for a friend right away, I was shocked, but she has a NAs and couple of computers that will take advantage of the extra speed.

In reply to a post by CarlTSpeak:

The 10G was installed after a home move so that it could be a 'one and done' job

That's exactly why I did it too.

I haven't made use of much of the fibre yet, just a single core out of the ~20 that are run to various locations. The actual fibre cost less than £150 including nice Euromodule based outlets which integrate copper Ethernet, fibre and even coax (as I will be suffering VM until better options arrive this year).

Not having to chase the walls out again is worth far more than £150 to me, and I value the cooler (and by extension, quieter) operation of fibre SFP+s.

If I get bored this week I might even do the energy consumption sums, electricity prices are only going one way.

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

Honestly I wouldn't bother - 1Gbps is plenty for many years in the future. It is more robust than fibre and considerably cheaper. I have just run Cat5e in my own house, including damaging walls etc. Fibre never even crossed my mind.

If you have a huge house and you're going to exceed 100m, then fair enough - even then I'd be considering just having 2x100m and a switch in the middle.

I would strongly recommend not running Cat5e. If you have any sort of home NAS then it is not enough in the near future. The marginal additional cost of going to Cat6a cable and future proofing yourself to 10GbE is well worth it, even if you save yourself some money and fit Cat5e face plates which are a lot cheaper than Cat6a ones. It's much easier to swap out the face plates than replace the cable, which will require lifting flooring etc. as opposed to screwing off a faceplate puching down a new module and screwing it back on the wall.

1Gbps is plenty. That is enough to transfer 1TB in under 3 hours. Plenty for streaming and backups. What home use case needs something faster than this?

Conversely I'd argue that 1 Gbps is the bare minimum capability "backbone" you should be installing today. Without considering LAN speeds look at what's happening with Internet access over the past 30 years, its gone from 19.2kbps V.32bis dial-up to 10Gbps XGS-PON. In 1989 you'd be fine running CW1308 all over your house, as its would have been "plenty"...

There are numerous obvious pointers to where things are headed - Terrestrial "broadcast" TV and radio is pretty much dying a long slow death. Everything is moving to on-demand / casting / streaming. Resolutions have moved from PAL/NTSC to HD then 4K now and 8K will be the norm in a few more years. Folks access their data in the cloud. The pandemic has transformed white collar working - more folks will continue to work from home by default, rather than the other way around. The concept of the "office" where everyone comes to work, every day for a lot of industries is now dead.

Not only are there now many gigabit service providers in the UK, we're seeing consumer and small business symmetric *multi-gigabit* offerings from the alt nets like Community Fibre. Its no good have cabling a house supporting 1 Gbps when providers could offer 10 Gbps on a broadband service. It's the wrong way around - the LAN should always be faster than the WAN - or at very least match what the WAN is capable off delivering now or not too far down the track - the whole entire point of putting the capability in now to be able serve you in 10 to 15 years time.

If someone is re-cabling their home then for the marginal 20% uplift in cost specify at least Cat6 standard. Please also don't mix and match Cat5e and Cat6/6A components, that is a terrible idea, just to save a few pennies.

In reply to a post by ft247:

In reply to a post by CarlTSpeak:

The 10G was installed after a home move so that it could be a 'one and done' job

That's exactly why I did it too.

I haven't made use of much of the fibre yet, just a single core out of the ~20 that are run to various locations. The actual fibre cost less than £150 including nice Euromodule based outlets which integrate copper Ethernet, fibre and even coax (as I will be suffering VM until better options arrive this year).

Not having to chase the walls out again is worth far more than £150 to me, and I value the cooler (and by extension, quieter) operation of fibre SFP+s.

If I get bored this week I might even do the energy consumption sums, electricity prices are only going one way.

As part of whole house renovations, I've re-cabled everything using Commscope Cat6A and performance tested it all with a Fluke DSX tester. Do it once do it properly.

For LAN extension, I have a few cores of single-mode fibre that run from my comms cabinet to outside - garden office and my study. We even use fibre for TV distribution - there is also single-mode fibre from the roof which is used to bring FIRS for Sky+/Freeview/FM to the same location - this go to a couple of little dSCR boxes and I push this out using coax internally or patched over to the fibre link to garden office where theres another dSCR transceiver. Perfect TV and radio reception courtesy of fibre.

Sky+/Freeview/FM headend in the enclosure on the right (ODU32 & splice box). Enclosure on left is a separate RFoverFibre application.
https://postimg.cc/68hbGR11