Found it! Here is the article from Fluke Networks.

Will My Existing Cable Plant Support 2.5/5GBASE-T? from January 2018.

N-BASET Performance and Cabling Guidelines (Ethernet Alliance / N-BASET Alliance, August 2016)

Final point, and then I'll feck off and go and drink some mulled wine and eat some mince pies.

There is a huge amount of variation in not only the quality of the cabling (and connectors) on structured cabling out there. There is also a vast chasm in how well these are installed.

In a commercial installation environment - these factors are de-risked by the following:

- Having correctly trained structured cabling designers and installation engineers that install cabling systems using reputable well known branded products that all match, the cabling, the connectors etc. In most cases these are inspected by the cabling manufacturer and warrantied for a period of 20 or 25 years.

- Following manufacturers guidelines for installation and adhering to industry standard like here in Europe/UK its ISO/IEC 11801 (the is. where cabling "Classes" come from) or in the states its ANSI/EIA-TIA 568 family of standard (this is where cabling "Categories" come from)

- Performance testing each and every permanent link (or sometimes channel), actually meets ClassE/Cat6A, Class D/Cat5e etc etc using a certified and correctly calibrated cabling tester like a Fluke Networks DSX-series cable analyser

In reply to a post by burble:

Very informative, two commonly asked and/or posted questions on here are, "I've got cat5e cables should I upgade them for my new FTTP connection", and "Do I need ca6 cable for my new FTTP connection", This shows that these cables are not working on the limits, but easily cope.

Not necessarily at all. It's extremely variable and not at all compliant to *any* standards. So if you're lucky enough to get a link to stay up, its doesn't mean every link will.

This is where these "wow look" videos sucker people.

Stick with the standards. That's what there for. Not this amateur hour garbage.

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

In reply to a post by jpm:

I assume that the packet loss is off the chart despite negotiating a 10Gb link, hence the speeds dropping to half where they want to be.

Would have been more interesting to take 100m of Cat5e and chopping 5m off it until it certifed.

Potentially as both sides support NBASE-T it's using downshifting to go to 5Gb as 10Gb wasn't viable. The straight 10GBASE-T spec doesn't allow this, the NBASE-T spec that provides the 2.5Gb and 5Gb speeds in between does. If a port only has 1Gb and 10Gb it's running 10GBASE-T, if it has the other two it's NBASE-T. Downshifting will lower rate depending on cable quality.

Indeed. The original NBASE-T Downshift protocol is described here:

https://archive.nbaset.ethernetalliance.org/wp-conte...

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

In reply to a post by burble:

Very informative, two commonly asked and/or posted questions on here are, "I've got cat5e cables should I upgade them for my new FTTP connection", and "Do I need ca6 cable for my new FTTP connection", This shows that these cables are not working on the limits, but easily cope.

Not necessarily at all. It's extremely variable and not at all compliant to *any* standards. So if you're lucky enough to get a link to stay up, its doesn't mean every link will.

This is where these "wow look" videos sucker people.

Stick with the standards. That's what there for. Not this amateur hour garbage.

FYI, 'these' in this case where the cables as tested.
As for the testing done in this video, I refer to your earlier post, to test the cables the equipment used was beyond the specs for cat5e, to test them with inferior equipment would be pointless, same as with tyres, to test a car tyre with a car incapable of challenging them would be pointless, you use a vehicle which can test the tyres and not the car.
I did jump through much of the video, so forgive me if I missed any part of it where it was suggested the cables should be used for anyone wanting 10G.