Wired Ethernet vs. HomePNA - Which is better for me?

[Joe Samangitak]

I'm currently waffling between the two different network technologies,
and looking for the opinion that may nudge me to one side or the
other.
Although I don't like the looks of Ethernet cable running across my
house,
if its faster overall and more stable than HomePNA, it may do. Here
are the
hardware setups:

1) Ethernet: We're talking a peer-to-peer Ethernet connection bewteen
2
computers, about 150-200ft of crossover cable, and one 10/100 NIC card
for each computer (no router or hub). Both computers will share a DSL
internet connection. My primary purpose here is to share the DSL
connection without any drop in speed. I might also share files and
printers, but that's secondary.

Not sure if I need "special" crossover cable or NIC cards to take
advantage of Ethernet Fast (100mbps) data transfer? If the above
equipment is all that's necessary for Ethernet Fast, then I guess this
system would be faster than the HomePNA below.

2) HomePNA: Diamond Homefree HPNA Networking Kit (2 PCI HomePNA 2.0
cards,
one for each computer).

Using XP Pro, and so I'm not sure if these HPNA cards will work under
XP Pro, since Diamond never wrote drivers for this. Have heard some
people say XP comes with the drivers, others say they can't get this
to work under XP if their life depended on it. Some say HomePNA is
slower than dialup under a DSL connection, others say its faster than
you could hope for under a DSL connection (HPNA 2.0 is rated at
10mbps).


So is there any distinct advantage (such as speed or reliability)
between either of these two technologies?

 

[Chuck]

I'm currently waffling between the two different network technologies,
and looking for the opinion that may nudge me to one side or the
other.
Although I don't like the looks of Ethernet cable running across my
house,
if its faster overall and more stable than HomePNA, it may do. Here
are the
hardware setups:

1) Ethernet: We're talking a peer-to-peer Ethernet connection bewteen
2
computers, about 150-200ft of crossover cable, and one 10/100 NIC card
for each computer (no router or hub). Both computers will share a DSL
internet connection. My primary purpose here is to share the DSL
connection without any drop in speed. I might also share files and
printers, but that's secondary.

Not sure if I need "special" crossover cable or NIC cards to take
advantage of Ethernet Fast (100mbps) data transfer? If the above
equipment is all that's necessary for Ethernet Fast, then I guess this
system would be faster than the HomePNA below.

2) HomePNA: Diamond Homefree HPNA Networking Kit (2 PCI HomePNA 2.0
cards,
one for each computer).

Using XP Pro, and so I'm not sure if these HPNA cards will work under
XP Pro, since Diamond never wrote drivers for this. Have heard some
people say XP comes with the drivers, others say they can't get this
to work under XP if their life depended on it. Some say HomePNA is
slower than dialup under a DSL connection, others say its faster than
you could hope for under a DSL connection (HPNA 2.0 is rated at
10mbps).


So is there any distinct advantage (such as speed or reliability)
between either of these two technologies?

Joe,

If the choice is between running 150 - 200 feet of Ethernet cable, or using PNA,
and you have a whole house splitter at your NID separating DSL and voice signal,
PNA is probably doable and advantageous. If you're running individual DSL
filters on each voice phone, then piggybacking DSL, voice, and PNA on the same
set of little wires probably isn't going to do it for you. I don't know how
well PNA and voice work together though.

You have a pretty big house. Why did you rule out WiFi? Seems like that would
be much better than running 150 - 200 feet of cable (and probably about as cheap
- that much cable, pre made, is not cheap).

If you're going to use Ethernet cable, don't waste money buying a cross-over
cable in that length (if you even can). Get regular straight-thru cable, then
either a hub / switch, or just a 3 foot cross-over cable, and an Ethernet F/F
adapter. A Female / Female adapter connected to a cross-over cable is the same
as a 2 connection hub. If you're going to need 150 feet or so run of cable, a
pre made cable could be pretty pricey - you'll do better buying bulk cable and
attaching connectors on the end.

With bulk cable, you're probably going to get solid core which is for
infrastructure installation - this is not the same as stranded patch cable. Get
JACKS (again for solid core cable) not PLUGS to attach to the ends, and secure
the JACKS - you don't need any strain on the cable connections - then run patch
cables from each jack to each computer. Look for jacks that don't require
punch-down tools - cutting, unwinding the cable, and punching it down so it
works is NOT a job for an amateur - I've tried it and I know. Self-punchdown
equipment is much easier to use.

All in all, in your case, I'd go for WiFi. In a second.

--
Cheers,
Chuck
Paranoia comes from experience - and is not necessarily a bad thing.
My email is AT DOT
actual address pchuck sonic net.

 

[joesamang]

For the record, I'm not looking at other technologies. Believe me, I've
already
done my research, and I'm not interested in other technologies. Some of
the reasons are that WiFi is by no means cheaper than Ethernet for me,
not by a long shot. I can get 150ft of cable for $12.99
(pre-terminated and in my choice of color: WHITE!), and I already have
the 10/100 cards. $12.99 is cheaper than buying a wireless router and 2
wireless PCI cards any day. (With a peer to peer network, which I plan
to configure if I go Ethernet, you have no need for a hub, a switch, a
router or any of that nonsense. You're simply connecting two PC's
together via a crossover cable. Why would I make this more complicated,
time-consuming and pricey, by terminating my own cables and adding
nonsense I don't need, like hubs, routers or switches?).

Plus I don't want to deal with worries about transmitting data over the
2.4ghz range, which can receive interference from anyone with a
wireless telephone, or roaming hackers, or WEP keys, or obstructions
reducing the speed or any of that nonsense that WiFi is susceptible to.
Ethernet in contrast, is a proven, stable, reliable, and secure
technology, and the software for it is built into Windows, and the
support is plentiful, if I have problems setting this up.

The simplest solution is always the most elegant and the least
troublesome, and nothing is simpler than the two network setups that
I'm looking at; both of which require only two NIC cards and some
cable. THe only thing is, I'm not 100% sure on HomePNA; whether its as
fast as the 10/100 Ethernet cards/crossover cable setup, whether it
-remains- fast when you're on the phone, etc., and whether the Diamond
Homefree Networking Kit PCI cards can be setup under Windows XP.

 

[Guest]

I agree with Chuck, IF it works.

I have a similar situation and have tried every WI-FI since they came out
and nothing works in my house. Looks like my house has an anthenna that
sucks up the signal. I get poor connection even 20 feet from the router.

Regarding Ethernet vs HPNA. Go Ethernet, definetly, if you can. Again,
that was my situation, but I HAD to choose HPNA. I've had it installed for 3
years now and have 3 PC's connected (2 XP Home & 1 XP Pro) and one laptop via
a bridged Access Point. Also have 2 printers attached to one PC and 1
printer each on the other two PC's. All PC's access the Internet fine and
all share folders and printers.

Reason why I HAD to choose HPNA was because I did not want to open up walls
here and there to run the cable to every single room. It is a pretty big
house, but at least the phone line is already in every room. I wasn't
fortunate enough to have a utility pipe running all the way from the basement
to the attic.

So, if you don't mind opening up walls, or having the cable running on the
floor, or under the carpet if you can, then go Ethernet.

Good luck,
Eduardo

 

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

I'm currently waffling between the two different network technologies,
and looking for the opinion that may nudge me to one side or the
other.
Although I don't like the looks of Ethernet cable running across my
house,
if its faster overall and more stable than HomePNA, it may do. Here
are the
hardware setups:

1) Ethernet: We're talking a peer-to-peer Ethernet connection bewteen
2
computers, about 150-200ft of crossover cable, and one 10/100 NIC card
for each computer (no router or hub). Both computers will share a DSL
internet connection. My primary purpose here is to share the DSL
connection without any drop in speed. I might also share files and
printers, but that's secondary.

Not sure if I need "special" crossover cable or NIC cards to take
advantage of Ethernet Fast (100mbps) data transfer? If the above
equipment is all that's necessary for Ethernet Fast, then I guess this
system would be faster than the HomePNA below.

2) HomePNA: Diamond Homefree HPNA Networking Kit (2 PCI HomePNA 2.0
cards,
one for each computer).

Using XP Pro, and so I'm not sure if these HPNA cards will work under
XP Pro, since Diamond never wrote drivers for this. Have heard some
people say XP comes with the drivers, others say they can't get this
to work under XP if their life depended on it. Some say HomePNA is
slower than dialup under a DSL connection, others say its faster than
you could hope for under a DSL connection (HPNA 2.0 is rated at
10mbps).


So is there any distinct advantage (such as speed or reliability)
between either of these two technologies?

In my experience, powerline networking is more reliable and easier to
set up than HPNA. Get a pair of powerline Ethernet bridges, like the
Netgear XE102. They connect to your computers' existing Ethernet
adapters, with no need for additional drivers.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

 

[Chuck]

For the record, I'm not looking at other technologies. Believe me, I've
already
done my research, and I'm not interested in other technologies. Some of
the reasons are that WiFi is by no means cheaper than Ethernet for me,
not by a long shot. I can get 150ft of cable for $12.99
(pre-terminated and in my choice of color: WHITE!), and I already have
the 10/100 cards. $12.99 is cheaper than buying a wireless router and 2
wireless PCI cards any day. (With a peer to peer network, which I plan
to configure if I go Ethernet, you have no need for a hub, a switch, a
router or any of that nonsense. You're simply connecting two PC's
together via a crossover cable. Why would I make this more complicated,
time-consuming and pricey, by terminating my own cables and adding
nonsense I don't need, like hubs, routers or switches?).

Plus I don't want to deal with worries about transmitting data over the
2.4ghz range, which can receive interference from anyone with a
wireless telephone, or roaming hackers, or WEP keys, or obstructions
reducing the speed or any of that nonsense that WiFi is susceptible to.
Ethernet in contrast, is a proven, stable, reliable, and secure
technology, and the software for it is built into Windows, and the
support is plentiful, if I have problems setting this up.

The simplest solution is always the most elegant and the least
troublesome, and nothing is simpler than the two network setups that
I'm looking at; both of which require only two NIC cards and some
cable. THe only thing is, I'm not 100% sure on HomePNA; whether its as
fast as the 10/100 Ethernet cards/crossover cable setup, whether it
-remains- fast when you're on the phone, etc., and whether the Diamond
Homefree Networking Kit PCI cards can be setup under Windows XP.

Well, Joe, if you can get a $13 150-foot crossover cable, then go for it. If
running 150 feet of cable thru the house is acceptable, and if it isn't subject
to damage (150 feet run of cable seems like a pretty good length, with some
potential for damage). If $13 for 150 feet is decent quality (seems awful
cheap). It does definitely beat dealing with bulk cable anyway.

If the 150-foot cable is pre-made straight-thru, then you would simply need a
short cross-over cable, and a F-F adapter, on one end.

Your concern about PNA seems justified. There's more discussion about that in
alt.comp.networking.connectivity and comp.dcom.cabling.

It sounds like you have a fun project, please let us know how it works out.

--
Cheers,
Chuck
Paranoia comes from experience - and is not necessarily a bad thing.
My email is AT DOT
actual address pchuck sonic net

 

[Joe Samangitak]

I agree with Chuck, IF it works.

I have a similar situation and have tried every WI-FI since they came out
and nothing works in my house. Looks like my house has an anthenna that
sucks up the signal. I get poor connection even 20 feet from the router.

Regarding Ethernet vs HPNA. Go Ethernet, definetly, if you can. Again,
that was my situation, but I HAD to choose HPNA. I've had it installed for 3
years now and have 3 PC's connected (2 XP Home & 1 XP Pro) and one laptop via
a bridged Access Point. Also have 2 printers attached to one PC and 1
printer each on the other two PC's. All PC's access the Internet fine and
all share folders and printers.

Reason why I HAD to choose HPNA was because I did not want to open up walls
here and there to run the cable to every single room. It is a pretty big
house, but at least the phone line is already in every room. I wasn't
fortunate enough to have a utility pipe running all the way from the basement
to the attic.

So, if you don't mind opening up walls, or having the cable running on the
floor, or under the carpet if you can, then go Ethernet.

Good luck,
Eduardo

THanks for your comments. I did my research on installing the cable,
and did not want to open up walls either, or drill holes through
walls. This is why I looked at no-new-wires networking technologies
(ie. HPNA, HomePlug -- ruled out WiFi as I felt it was too
complicated, too many possibilities for faults). I wasn't looking to
wire up 3 floors of a house, just to run the wire down the hall into
the front room (about 50-75 ft from the first computer). I settled on
traditional wired Ethernet because I looked harder, and found I could
lay down the cable without doing any remodelling of my apt., and
without it showing very much.

The cable would have to travel past the computer room, through a
kitchen, past numerous closets, down the hall, and into the living
room. I did it by choosing to run it along the baseboards, even behind
the baseboards (if I can take them up easily). There is a small gap
under the doors of the rooms, so I was able to have the wire exit the
room without drilling holes through the wall. Same deal with the
closets, its going to snake its way underneath and behind the closet
doors, so it doesn't show all the way down the hallway. However, it
has to cross the hallway in order to enter the last room. Can't have
it going across the floor, so in this case, I'm having it go around
the door frame, and come out under the door. Mission accomplished,
with no drills. Just a hammer and those little white plastic cable
supports.

I settled on 150' of WHITE Cat6 ethernet crossover cable. My entire
networking setup cost me $35 CDN. (already had the 10/100 cards). The
$13 I quoted for 150' crossover Cat5e was in US funds, taken from a
current eBay cat5 cable seller's ad. But the shipping adds another $13
for this length, so all told, I got better cable from a local supply
outfit for less than what I was going to get. (Custom made for me,
dealer even came tonight to deliver it to my house!).

I am confident that this is the best option, because the HomePNA stuff
made me nervous, since none of the HPNA 2.0 cards seem to have
"official" driver support for XP, and I was getting mixed feedback on
whether XP supports this older hardware. The fact that they are dirt
cheap on eBay was an attractive proposition however (a recent auction
for a Diamond HomeFree HPNA 2.0 PCI cards sold for $2 a card! That's
$4 for a networking system for 2 computers! ).

 

[Joe Samangitak]

Well, Joe, if you can get a $13 150-foot crossover cable, then go for it. If
running 150 feet of cable thru the house is acceptable, and if it isn't subject
to damage (150 feet run of cable seems like a pretty good length, with some
potential for damage). If $13 for 150 feet is decent quality (seems awful
cheap). It does definitely beat dealing with bulk cable anyway.

I was going to buy the cable from a cat5 cable power seller on eBay,
who regularly sells what appear to be quality cables (he advertises
50micron gold as opposed to the cheaper 30 micron, etc). It's $12.99
but the shipping is about as much on lengths of 150'. I found that
crossover cable in these kind of lengths is very hard to find,
particularly in white. He was the only one on the net I found that was
selling this stuff in lengths of 200', in white, and every other color
under the rainbow. In most cases, if you want to avoid the
complications of a router, hub, switch etc and need a crossover cable
of this kind of length (100-200'), you're going to require having it
custom made.

My length is about 30' more than I needed, so I figure if it does
develop damage along the way, I can always splice in a fix.

If the 150-foot cable is pre-made straight-thru, then you would simply need a
short cross-over cable, and a F-F adapter, on one end.

Aha... I was wondering if there was a way to adapt the crossover to a
non-crossover ethernet cable. I don't need to do what you described,
since I actually got a 150ft crossover cable. It was harder to obtain
than a regular cable, but then I didn't know you could just get a
regular non-crossover cable, and add a small length of crossover cable
at the end, with the help of a special adapter.... Good to know in the
future, if I ever want to install a firewall router.

Your concern about PNA seems justified. There's more discussion about that in
alt.comp.networking.connectivity and comp.dcom.cabling.

It sounds like you have a fun project, please let us know how it works out.

I will, thanks. For me, it's only the beginning of my education, since
I have no idea how to set up the software end of a networking system
under XP...

 

[Guest]

Good job!

If you do decide in switching to HPNA, I think it will work fine, albeit a
bit slower than Ethernet. Mine works great (I'm guessing at 4-5 Mbps or so),
but have not felt the need to go any faster. I can tell the difference when
I am connected with my laptop (wireless via an Access Point, at 54 Mbps), but
it is no big deal.

The HPNA works remarkably well, even when the line is been used for voice or
with the fax. But, it is true. This is old technology and not supported
anymore by some manufacturers. I was lucky to be able to get a Linksys card
as a spare from Staples, online only. Staples doesn't carry it in the stores
and Linksys discontinued it.

I guess manufacturers are trying to push everybody towards wireless.

Cheers,
Eduardo