Jump to content

Wireless Connection


gerald sundberg
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have an existing wireless network across the street and would like to connect another CTB16PC to that end of the network. When we hook up the controller we do not see it on the network. We are using Engenius EOC2611P one in bridge and the distant end in Access Point but the controller is hard wired to the antennas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gerald sundberg wrote:

I have an existing wireless network across the street and would like to connect another CTB16PC to that end of the network. When we hook up the controller we do not see it on the network. We are using Engenius EOC2611P one in bridge and the distant end in Access Point but the controller is hard wired to the antennas.
this is a RS485 network communicating over Ethernet so standard networking topologies don't apply.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

caniac wrote:

gerald sundberg wrote:
I have an existing wireless network across the street and would like to connect another CTB16PC to that end of the network. When we hook up the controller we do not see it on the network. We are using Engenius EOC2611P one in bridge and the distant end in Access Point but the controller is hard wired to the antennas.
this is a RS485 network communicating over Ethernet so standard networking topologies don't apply.
Caniac,

I dont think your above statement is true if I am reading what your wrote correctly. You state that this is RS-485 network communicating over Ethernet. Now Ethernet is a protocol as I remember it. Much like RS-485 is a protocol. A true statement is that this is RS-485 network communicating over Cat5 cable.

It appears to be a minor difference between the two statements. But a major difference in the end results. So easy to make a mistake when working with technical stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max-Paul wrote:

caniac wrote:
gerald sundberg wrote:
I have an existing wireless network across the street and would like to connect another CTB16PC to that end of the network. When we hook up the controller we do not see it on the network. We are using Engenius EOC2611P one in bridge and the distant end in Access Point but the controller is hard wired to the antennas.
this is a RS485 network communicating over Ethernet so standard networking topologies don't apply.
Caniac,

I don't think your above statement is true if I am reading what your wrote correctly. You state that this is RS-485 network communicating over Ethernet. Now Ethernet is a protocol as I remember it. Much like RS-485 is a protocol. A true statement is that this is RS-485 network communicating over Cat5 cable.

It appears to be a minor difference between the two statements. But a major difference in the end results. So easy to make a mistake when working with technical stuff.
Let's not go there! Your splitting hairs and in this environment it really doesn't matter. Some folks pick up the cable and think Ethernet while others call it Cat5, at the end of the day no matter what you call it this is not a PC networking environment like the original poster assumed. I have worked with ArcNet, Token Ring, Ethernet, and some lesser known topologies so I do know the difference between Potato and Potaato!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

caniac wrote:

Max-Paul wrote:
caniac wrote:
gerald sundberg wrote:
I have an existing wireless network across the street and would like to connect another CTB16PC to that end of the network. When we hook up the controller we do not see it on the network. We are using Engenius EOC2611P one in bridge and the distant end in Access Point but the controller is hard wired to the antennas.
this is a RS485 network communicating over Ethernet so standard networking topologies don't apply.
Caniac,

I don't think your above statement is true if I am reading what your wrote correctly. You state that this is RS-485 network communicating over Ethernet. Now Ethernet is a protocol as I remember it. Much like RS-485 is a protocol. A true statement is that this is RS-485 network communicating over Cat5 cable.

It appears to be a minor difference between the two statements. But a major difference in the end results. So easy to make a mistake when working with technical stuff.
Let's not go there! Your splitting hairs and in this environment it really doesn't matter. Some folks pick up the cable and think Ethernet while others call it Cat5, at the end of the day no matter what you call it this is not a PC networking environment like the original poster assumed. I have worked with ArcNet, Token Ring, Ethernet, and some lesser known topologies so I do know the difference between Potato and Potaato!!
No there is quite a bit of difference and I refuse to dummy down to your level. Call an ACE and ACE and a Spade a Spade. And if you dont like it, tough. There is enough people coming in here thinking that they can connect their Cat5 cable to a Ethernet switch or wireless device. We dont need to just say Ethernet and get more of the new folks confused.
If you cant stand being corrected when you are in error. Then just keep your mouth shut. I screw up from time to time and get corrected. Dont see me crying about it. then why dont you learn to take a correction when you are mistaken. Its not like I slapped you around as I have been known to do to others.

And it is attitudes like this that causes the confusion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max-Paul wrote:

caniac wrote:
Max-Paul wrote:
caniac wrote:
gerald sundberg wrote:
I have an existing wireless network across the street and would like to connect another CTB16PC to that end of the network. When we hook up the controller we do not see it on the network. We are using Engenius EOC2611P one in bridge and the distant end in Access Point but the controller is hard wired to the antennas.
this is a RS485 network communicating over Ethernet so standard networking topologies don't apply.
Caniac,

I don't think your above statement is true if I am reading what your wrote correctly. You state that this is RS-485 network communicating over Ethernet. Now Ethernet is a protocol as I remember it. Much like RS-485 is a protocol. A true statement is that this is RS-485 network communicating over Cat5 cable.

It appears to be a minor difference between the two statements. But a major difference in the end results. So easy to make a mistake when working with technical stuff.
Let's not go there! Your splitting hairs and in this environment it really doesn't matter. Some folks pick up the cable and think Ethernet while others call it Cat5, at the end of the day no matter what you call it this is not a PC networking environment like the original poster assumed. I have worked with ArcNet, Token Ring, Ethernet, and some lesser known topologies so I do know the difference between Potato and Potaato!!
No there is quite a bit of difference and I refuse to dummy down to your level. Call an ACE and ACE and a Spade a Spade. And if you dont like it, tough. There is enough people coming in here thinking that they can connect their Cat5 cable to a Ethernet switch or wireless device. We dont need to just say Ethernet and get more of the new folks confused.
If you cant stand being corrected when you are in error. Then just keep your mouth shut. I screw up from time to time and get corrected. Dont see me crying about it. then why dont you learn to take a correction when you are mistaken. Its not like I slapped you around as I have been known to do to others.

And it is attitudes like this that causes the confusion.
what causes confusion is a person that nitpicks everyone post!! If you are gonna spend all this time nitpicking at least take an extra minute or two to use a grammar checker!! I don't have a problem being corrected but do take issue with someone that nitpicks everyone's post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

gerald sundberg wrote:

Well it looks like I've poked a hornets nest, sorry I asked.
Actually you asked a valid question and I hope you got the answer you needed. Don't let this exchange cause you to hesitate to ask again.

Sometimes on here you have a select few that will slap your hand if you don't cross the T's and dot the I's (though they don't grammar/spell check their post). Luckily they are few and far between.

The vast majority on here are very helpful with all the questions we ask.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gerald,

You did nothing wrong so dont worry about it. Caniac admits to his knowledge level. Yet he indiscriminately throws around terms that are not related to what we are working with. I dont care if a newbie does not realize the real difference between Cat5 cable is a physical item and Ethernet is a protocol (voltages and sequence of data). For what ever reason other than availability of CAT5 wire / cables. But the protocol that LOR uses is RS-485. And due to the voltage differences, damages are possible for mixing the two protocols on the same cables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should be noted that the RS485 network for LOR also passes some power around for devices like the ELL. So plugging these in to an HUB or Switch can apply power to connections in unintended places.

That being said if your are using some sort of RS485 Ethernet bridge and it worked in the past. Have you tried daisy-chaining the second controller off the first eliminating the second bridge connection?

Logically if the first controller is receiving the signals the second controller connected to the first should see the same network traffic.

Hope that helps!

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max-Paul wrote:

Gerald,

You did nothing wrong so dont worry about it. Caniac admits to his knowledge level. Yet he indiscriminately throws around terms that are not related to what we are working with. I dont care if a newbie does not realize the real difference between Cat5 cable is a physical item and Ethernet is a protocol (voltages and sequence of data). For what ever reason other than availability of CAT5 wire / cables. But the protocol that LOR uses is RS-485. And due to the voltage differences, damages are possible for mixing the two protocols on the same cables.
you just can't stop, if you want to have a bashing contest at least be man enough to take it to PM!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max-Paul wrote:

What? Afraid of the truth and want to hide it in some PMs?
no not really, don't think the forum was particularly set up for you and I to hijack a thread to bash each other. If I get the ok from the mod's then it is on like Donkey Kong! I do not fear a man in a dress!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...